User:Jtenny/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Visual Rhetoric

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This piece has a section on memes, which is not very robust. I study memes in a number of ways, but visual rhetoric is not something I have explicitly focused on.

Overall, visual rhetoric is very interesting, and I feel like I need to know more.

Evaluate the article
Lead section: There is a lot of information, but I feel like it could be more concise. There are a few sentences about "analyzing the visual text" and the section below it can be organized a little better. I do not have an exact example, it is just a feeling I get from reading over it.

Content: I feel that I could find information on how other cultures used visual rhetoric other than the Greeks. Immediately, I think about Egyptian iconography that painted pharaohs closer to a godly image, rather than how the person may have looked. I am sure there is more examples of the use of images in ancient artworks (although I am sure that I would find that people focus more on the images they are familiar with, leaving many other cultures).

In addition, it would be helpful to add more to the shorter sections to better represent how other cultures. I do not know if references to pictographic languages would be an appropriate addition to visual grammar/literacy.

From what I see, the sources look relevant and cover a wide span of information. The section for memes do not have much about the visual importance of memes (multimodal, culturally driven, codes created by the internet community). The last paragraph of the memes section writes about anonymity, but current events would discredit some of it (also it does not have to do with memes as visual rhetoric).

Organization: The shorter sections are easy to read, but I feel it can be organized better. In addition, after looking at the talk page, this article is part of a few WikiProjects. I think with the number of different fields adding to the page, the organization of information is a little scattered.

Images/Media: There are a few images, but for a page on visual rhetoric, it could be more helpful. I think adding a meme to the meme section could be fun, but then you run into copyright issues.

Talk page: people have suggested adding more information about social media! So I have a buy in here.

In all: I feel it would be helpful to organize the information a little better, but I want to focus on the meme section and add research about memes as visual arguments and the of memes and social justice.

Comments from Dr. Vetter
Hello, thanks for posting your evaluation of this article. You have a great start here. Just a quick note. Since is also interested in this article it might be useful to check out the comments I left for them, as well as to coordinate with them in terms of the eventual edits you want to make.

I think a great place to really assess and add content to would be the history section. You've already noted how it mainly focuses on the Greeks, this would be a great place to bring in other historical traditions and make reference to pictographic languages.

You also write that "The section for memes do not have much about the visual importance of memes (multimodal, culturally driven, codes created by the internet community). The last paragraph of the memes section writes about anonymity, but current events would discredit some of it (also it does not have to do with memes as visual rhetoric)." I love this assessment and I think that you could create subheadings using the visual editor function "Subheading 1" to create new subsections within this section.

Of course, finding relevant sources that can add content to this article will be key! Hope this is helpful feedback - Let me know what follow-up questions you have.

DarthVetter (talk) 15:53, 5 February 2021 (UTC)