User:Jlowe022/Evaluate an Article

Visual Communication

 * This particular article captures the essence of visual communication and why it is important. I found it interesting because I am a Graphic Designer, and I would like to dive deeper into how communicating visually can have just as big of an impact as verbal communication.

Lead Evaluation
The Lead of the article gives a brief overview of Visual Communication and a little sense of background to ensure that the reader can grasp the overall idea. While it does give an overview, there is a lack of establishing what major sections will be mentioned in the article. However the Lead does do a fairly good job of making sure that it is cohesive with what's to follow. Overall, this Lead though fairly brief, does a good job of letting the reader know what the article is about.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content Evaluation
The content of the article is somewhat relevant to the topic. It would have been nice to see more of a "forward-looking" approach towards the end. The content is also up to date, as it had a particular reference from 2016. Some more content could of been added as it relates to how visual communication is changing due to technological advancements. It was mentioned briefly, but not in too much detail. This would have helped newcomers understand how visual communication has changed over time.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone Evaluation
The overall tone of the article is neutral. This can be credited to the fact that this article is more so informing rather than addressing a topic. The article also showed both sides of different forms of visual elements, which further helped in creating a neutral tone. There wasn't a feeling of "do this" or "think that" either, the information was presented nicely. As stated before, the only topic within the article that I feel was underrepresented was how visual communication has changed over time and is continuing to change.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References Evaluation
The article was well cited, although some more references could have been included. The references catered to the overall topic of the article and supported what was being presented. There was a wide range dates (1981 up to 2016). This was a good way of making sure that the information is being updated as time progresses. Most of the links in the article work. The ones in the beginning paragraph lead to other pages that gave a description, just so the reader could gain further understanding.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization
One reason why I enjoyed this article was because I love the idea of visual communication, and it was a fairly easy read. My only critique is that it could have been a little more organized, and maybe some more content could have been added. It would have been nice to see other career fields be mentioned, or how visual communication has invaded traditional workspaces. Those are just a few things I believe would help make the article stronger.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media
The article had around three pictures. Only one helped in understanding the particular piece it was talking about. The other images were too complex. It's nice to look at a simple image when reading an article, I find that it's more receptive when you don't have to understand so many things at once. It can be overwhelming. Although some of the images were complex, they were captioned well. I would say one or two more images could have been displayed just to give a break to the eye when it came to reading.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Talk Page Evaluation
One particular reply mentioned the overall effectiveness of the images that were displayed, offering a better alternative to help the reader understand the methods of visual communication. The article is rated Star-class, and is a part of WikiProject Graphic Design. Compared to what we talk about in class, I would say this article focus on technicalities and history, to whereas in class we discuss "the now" of visual communication and how it's influencing our future.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions
The overall status of the article was Star-class. Its strength was that it did a great job of defining and giving background information on visual communication, how it got started, and pioneers in visual communication. While having Star-class status, I feel as if the article is somewhat underdeveloped, and the content of the article could be improved. More information can be added just because so much has happened in visual communication just in the last five to ten years.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: