User:Jordanamarinelli/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Alternative media
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose this article to evaluate because I know it is one many people must have worked on.I think it will help me get familiar with how wikipedia works. I also just really like the topic and find it interesting to learn about.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The lead does include an introductory sentence that is concise and clear. The lead does not lay out the subsequent major sections, but it does give an idea of what is to come. It does for example in the lead mention the counter culture zines, projects, and platforms and then does not include a sections or discussion of this later on in the article. The lead is concise overall still and easy to read and understand.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
Yes, the content is relevant to the topic at hand. As alternative media studies is rooted in media scholars, the information is accurate and reflects the field appropriately. Content that could be added could be more recent platforms for alternative media. These could be added to the list to make it a bit more up to date.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
Yes this article is neutral. I did not see any claims that appear to be heavily biased, different positionalities are mentioned and taken into account. I think the article does a good job of discussing from different actor perspectives. I do not see any persuasion.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
The reference list is well rounded. All the articles are peer reviewed or come from scholar in the field of alternative media. The links I clicked through work. The quantity and diversity of sources reflects well.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
The headings are clear and laid out in a way that is easy to follow. I like how it starts with definitions and ends with examples. This makes it easy to understand for the reader. It includes major topics like the public sphere, democratic theory, and social movements. The examples are thorough and cover a good basis for someone wanting to know what alternative media covers. Again, It would be nice for it to include some examples that are a bit more current. Other than that, have no other critique of the organizational structure.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
Yes, the images included reflect where they are situated and help the reader conceptualize the examples. I think this article would benefit from more pictures as they are very minimal. They have a proper caption and the links worked when I tried them.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
There is quite a bit of conversation happening on this page. People have continued to make spelling edits and citing edits. There is also conversation about making the introduction more concise. A section on counter hegemony was removed and improved to make more sense. It is listed as a level-5 vital article in society. It is/was the subject of a wiki education foundation supported course assignment. This page does a pretty great job of discussing the topic as we have in class. When i read it, I found it to link to so many themes such as public sphere, democracy, journalism, the forms, and participatory culture. The only thing missing from what we talk about is brining up the political implications, for example, how alternative journalism chooses to cover politics and other government associations. This could be because we usually critique in our course, while this a neutral platform.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
This article does not seem to be currently worked on by many people. The strengths is that it remains neutral and encapsulates a great overview of the topic area for someone wanting to learn about what alternative media is. It can be improved by having more current examples and more pictures. Overall, I still would say it is well developed and includes necessary information.

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: