User:LilahMonahan/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (link) Answer: Communication studies
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Answer: I decided to cover this article because it relates to the industry I am studying. I also picked this because communication widely varies and is constantly growing and changing. Such as letters being considered ancient and email considered the new way that people send messages.

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:
Answer: The lead has an introductory sentence that defines what communication studies is. This gives the reader a basic knowledge as well a summary of the information that communication studies involves and what will be said later on in the article as well. There is a description of all the sections and content that the article will cover. It does not cover anything that will not be presented later on in the article. Everything needed has a permalink for additional information as needed. I think that is concise informational wise, however, I find it a bit wordy for someone just diving into the world of communications.

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:
Answer: At first I thought there could be more added to the contexts as their is not many topics listed. However, once you take a look under "Professional associations" you see that there are all types of related societies and associations that can teach you and broaden your understanding of the information further. The contents seems to be all relevant and all around World War I and up to the 20th century which is very important for the study of communications. It talks about many colleges and people, but it has yet to relate to anything involving under-priveledge communities and how they may connect to communication studies.

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
Answer: The article is neutral and speaks on how communications and communication studies have come into existence. The article is very concise and the only thing that I find missing is how these studies are not only at great colleges and universities but at a younger level or for people who do not have access to university. There is no position to be swayed towards.

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
Answer: Predominately each source was reliable, however, I did notice that a few sources seem to be from academic journals but titled SIGMOBILE which is a company related to engineers and communications. This may create a bias, as some of the sources cited are reviews by SIGMOBILE.

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
Answer: As I mentioned before the article is very concise, getting past the lead it becomes easier to read. There are no spelling or grammatical errors and is broken down well as I mentioned when talking about the sections.

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
Answer: Not relevant as there are no pictures included.

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
Answer: There are quite a few interactions where people are proposing more sections and topics as there is an importance to having certain information. I mentioned that I thought originally there would be more sections, but there weren't. I think people are doing a great job at re-evaluation and adding where necessary. It is listed as a "level-5 vital article in Society." It is also apart of 5 WikiProjects of Media, Sociology, Linguistics, Philopshy, and Science.

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
Answer: Overall, the article is great because of how concise it is. I do believe like some people said in the talk page, other sections may be relevant to add. I think that it gets straight to the point and is an easy read.

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: