User:Juliammanning/sandbox

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Media, Culture & Society
 * Article Evaluation
 * What is written is relevant and neutral, however there is little content on the page. There is no discussion on the talk page of this article.
 * Sources
 * The sources used for the content are used often and properly.

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Global Media and Communication
 * Article Evaluation
 * There is very little content on the Global Media and Communication page. What is written is related to topic and written in a neutral tone. There are no wikipedians on the talk page discussing the page.
 * Sources
 * In-text citations are used, however they are unreliable. There are no references listed.

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Feminist Media Studies
 * Article Evaluation
 * There is little content on this page, however what is written is relevant and neutral. There is no content on the talk page.
 * Sources
 * In-text citations are used, but references are not. Wikipedia has a flag at the top of the page for unreliable sources.

Which article are you evaluating?
WikiProject Internet culture

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this WikiProject because it is current and interesting to find more information on a culture that is so vastly used everyday. My first impression on the page was that it was organized quite well, however there is little actual content describing what internet culture is or consists of.

Evaluate the article
The internet culture WikiProject does not have a good lead section. It's lead section has one sentence describing what the page is, but other than that it doesn't tell the reader what internet culture actually is. The content of the page is mostly made up of self promotion of contributors, along with some statistics of "quality internet culture articles" that seem to just be the opinions of the contributors. The page does have good organization, making it easy for viewers to digest the information on the page. They contributors do attribute any information on the page, my properly citing. There is not much media on the page, other than a few emojis, which are placed in a way that makes sense and doesn't distract from the content. The talk page of this WikiProject is mostly compiled of contributors disputing their recently deleted, inappropriate contributions to the page, accompanied by an odd internet troll.

Overall, the page has good potential and a good foundation to start. However, it could use more useful content about the topic.