User:Koatman/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Disinformation

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I felt like it was something that tied well into this course. I thought it would also be interesting to see some other outside views on how disinformation impacts people today.

Evaluate the article
The lead section does a good job of explaining what disinformation is and giving a bit of historical background information on this as well. However it doesn't necessarily set up the whole article for what is going to be talked about. The content does a good job following the history of disinformation and how people have abused that to get people to have skewed views however I would not consider it up to do since it finishes around 2016 and problems with disinformation have definitely escalated quiet a bit since then especially with such a large social media presence. This article is obviously against the idea of disinformation and pushes that point all throughout. However, I do not feel that this article is persuasive since most people would agree that disinformation is something that should be worked against. The sources are all backed by working links and seemingly factual information. However, the writing quality can be a bit low; for example one part of the article about responses from cultural leaders only talks about one instance involving Pope Francis and no one else. I did notice in the talk page that the members were wondering whether this post would only focus exclusively on US and Russia or if they would branch out into other instances of disinformation and I would agree that this article may focus a bit too heavy on these few larger governments. This article is good and has strengths when it comes to explaining the background and history of disinformation and how it evolved over the years but could definitely be improved by including a lot more information about current situations since most people would agree that disinformation has grown a lot over the past few years. The article lacks completeness in the way that it does not cover how disinformation affects a lot more of the world and only focus on a few instances rather than providing more evidence to support its claims.