User:Kingap21/Evaluate an Article

Face-to-face interaction
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Face-to-face interaction
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose 'face-to-face interaction' due to its significance to various relational communication processes. For my selected course review topic of 'Apology', face-to-face interaction plays a critical role in the delivery and acceptance of information shared during an apology interaction.

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 well in providing an introductory definition of face-to-face interaction, and in what fields of study the concept is most relevant. The Lead then connects these concepts to the overall process of socialization ('Face-to face interaction', 2013). Aside from the content table listed on the Wikipedia page itself, the Lead does not specifically list what subtopics of face-to-face interaction are to be covered in the remaining article. However, for the size of the page, it is not difficult to determine the subtopics to be the general history of the study of face-to-face interaction, the emergence of mediated communication methods, the comparison of mediated communication methods to face-to-face interaction, and the concept of face-to-face across cultures. Lastly, the Lead is very to the point and guides to a neutral outlook on the topic.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The material in the article is certainly relevant to what face-to-face interaction is. The writer focuses primarily on connecting the component of communication to overall human interaction experiences and its impact to influencing the meaning of information. I would consider most of the information shared to be up to date. Personally, I feel the history section is a little too modern, in not referring to the historic discussions of Plato and Socrates regarding written philosophy and its overall lack of value versus spoken dialogue of the same information [1]. This historical connection in support of face-to-face interaction can be found on the Wikipedia page of Phonocentrism.

Additionally, the section of face-to-face interaction across cultures is somewhat similar in discussion to that of the comparison of mediated communication versus face-to-face interaction. In first reviewing the article, I was under the impression that the 'multicultural' section was to go over the value of face-to-face interaction across actual cultures within the human race. Instead, the multicultural section could have been combined with the subtopics discussing mediated communication styles, considering the technological advances within communication mediums that now allow for face-to-face interaction to be take place.

Reference


 * 1) Evans, Joseph Claude (1991). Strategies of deconstruction: Derrida and the myth of the voice. University of Minnesota Press.

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
In reading the artile, the overall tone of the discussion of face-to-face interaction is neutral. There are no hard claims within the article, that seemed to favor or disfavor face-to-face communication. There was some discussion of preferences, but this information was properly cited with sources that seemed to be geared toward studies of different communication prefrences per situations.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
A review of the reference list for the article shows a decent combination of scholarly publications, though most do appear to be literature reviews or compilation texts of various researchers. It also appears that some direct research articles regarding face-to-face interaction were used in the discussion of preference. The sources used are current and thorough and the article provides pages to where access to publications are either free, or list the means by which the information can be accessed for verification. The superscripts within the article are properly linked to the reference list with links to the outside pages where the information can be accessed. Within the article, the writer(s) also do well in listing one resource per sentence, which clearly shows in which respect information was pulled from each source. This helps when determining which resource would be relevant for certain focuses.

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
Through reading the page, the wiriting is clear and direct. There are no grammatical or spelling errors. The sentence structure is short and seems to go along with each source used to construct the general section of the article, which is helpful for referring to the various resources for research purposes.

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
There are no images included in the face-to-face interaction article, so unfotunately the matter of proper copyright approaches for this aspect of creating/editing pages can't be discussed. However, I do feel that images could be included to illustrate the differences in meaning of communication when someone is smiling versus crying, has a straight face, etc. This would assist in supporting the importance of face-to-face interaction in basic communication and its impact on social interaction(s).

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
A review of the talk page for face-to-face interaction shows the article is a part of Linguistics and Sociology WikiProject groups. Additionally, the article was included in two (2) Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignments for Palm Beach State College (2018) and Rowan College at Burlington County (2019). Considering this is the beginning of the term for COM-563, the concept of face-to-face interaction has not yet been openly discussed in theory, so to compare a collective address to the article would be difficult. However, in reviewing the definition of face-to-face interaction per the article, the concept presented through the Wikipedia page is valid in assignments for our course that call for mediated face-to-face interaction. An example of this is the weekly assignments done via FlipGrid posts. In FlipGrid, classmates are able to visually see the communication processes of their peers to include matters of frusturation, confusion, happiness or boredom. These moods are set by body language components of facial expression, eye contact (with the camera), posture, and tone of voice. Through this experience, the components of face-to-face interaction are applied and play a role in the communication processes of how we discuss questions/scenarios.

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
The article was last edited, August 2020. Overall, the strenghts of the article include the straightforwardness of the material and clear connection to the larger focus of human communication and interaction. Aside from the revision of the subtiopics of mediated communication and multicultural application of face-to-face interaction, there isn't really any improvements that can be considered necessary. Perhaps, some scholarly information (if possible) on the value of face-to-face interaction across world cultures will help define its importance, but its not necessary. Overall, I would conisdered this article well-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: