User:Libbyallen/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Visual communication

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I stuidied visual art in high school, and thought this was an interesting segway into communication while it still being a topic I am slightly familar with. My first impression was that the article looks in pretty good shape. It's organized and detailed but could use more pictures and examples since this focuses on visual aspects of communication.

Evaluate the article
The article provides a clear introductory sentence that defines visual communication, then goes into an overview of the topic. The lead section then introduces the main subsections of the article. The article does not include information that is not present and relevant to the article. The lead is concise and to the point, while still introducing the topic with needed introductory information.

The article's content is all relevant to the topic. The article seems up to date, especially with the addition of the social media subsection. There is information towards the beginning that references types of visual communication like signs, graphic design, and animation, which are mentioned in the rest of the article but not in detail. These types are hyperlinked to their respective Wikipedia pages. There is information lacking about the underrepresented population's contributions to visual communication. The historical figures mentioned are all white men.

The article is neutral and non-biased. There are no claims that are heavily biased toward a particular position. The viewpoints presented are factual and informational, but most of the historical people attributed to the history of visual communication were all white men. These were only a few sentences. There is no discussion of minority viewpoints. The article does not try to persuade the reader in any way.

All facts are backed up by a secondary source, except for four sentences scattered throughout that say citation needed or self-published source that needs updating. All sources are thorough with many being from published academic papers. I don't see the authors being very diverse. A lot of the sources used were academic, but when the information was more straightforward and simple information blogs or other websites were used. But I think that these were fitting considering the type of information they were getting from these sources. The links are working well.

The article is well-written and easy to read. There are no obvious spelling errors that disrupted the reading. The images adhere to copyright regulations, except the one next to social media is missing a full link. The images are visually appealing, but I think more would help explain the topic better.

There are not any conversations going on behind the scenes. The article is listed as a level-5 vital article in society and rated as a start-class. It is a part of wikiprojects for graphic design, media, and systems. This article talks about how it is used in politics, culture, politics, science, and economics, and goes into more information on topics we spend less time on.

The article is well written and looks in pretty good shape. The article's strength is in its subsections, with them being extremely organized and detailed. I think the article can be improved by fixing those view sources and adding more images. I think the article is well-developed and well rounded.