User:LSC536 Alyssa Downey/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Censored Eleven

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I started with looking under the "linguistics" tab, then clicked on "communication" which was listed under that, from there I clicked on "censored communication in the US" and that lead to "censored films" which lead me to this article. I decided to focus on the topic of censored materials because it is one that librarians have to face oftentimes in their career.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The introductory sentence clearly describes the topic of the article. For a more brief overview the whole first paragraph can be read. The lead paragraph does not include a description of the articles major sections, but does include a table of contents that allows the reader to jump to various sections on the page. The lead is concise and not overly detailed.

Content: The content of the article is all relevant to the topic and directly addresses an issue with a historically under represented population. It appears the content is fairly up-to-date, with the most recent update on the status of the eleven censored cartoons being from a reference from 2018, but the most current edit on the page being May 29, 2022.

Tone and Balance: The tone of the article is neutral, it does not attempt to persuade the reader in one position or another. It states the fact about what the censored eleven are, what has happened to the films over the years, and provided a list of updates as to what is happen to them currently and why.

Sources and References: Some of the sources and references are reliable, the most notable of them being the New York Times. TV Guide is listed as a reference, which is well known, but not necessarily for it's reliable information. The main references could be updated, both of those being from 2011. It might be worthwhile to look and see if more recent articles have been written on the subject by a reliable outlet. There are some more recent articles on the subject, from 2021, such as one from the website "The National" that could be looked into. I'm not entirely sure how biased that website is towards the topic though.

Organization and Writing Quality: The article is concise and clear and easy to read with appropriate subsections. There were no grammatical errors that I found, but I do feel as though some of the wording could be rewritten to be clearer.

Images and Media: There are two videos embedded into the article that depict 2 of the 11 cartoons that are censored. They have been properly cited and are well captioned. They absolutely add to the understanding of the topic.

Talk page discussion: It appears several sections of the page were removed by an editor in July of 2021 that were verified to be false information about the topic. It is of interest to 4 WikiProjects that range from low-importance to mid-importance.

Overall impressions: Overall, I thought the article as it is displayed now does a good job of giving a solid overview of the topic. It seems that this was not always how it appeared based on the Talk Page discussion, but as of right now it appears to give just the facts and is written in a neutral voice. I think the article could be improved by incorporating more recent updates on the status of the films, since the last status update was from 4 years ago. Some research could be done to see if the topic has been written about in any relatively recent peer reviewed articles as well. As for its completeness, I think it is fairly developed, especially in the overview area, it does a good job to getting the main topic information across, but could benefit from being updated with more recent references.