User:Lleigh1992/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Political communication

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen to evaluate the political communication article because political communication is something that I am very much interested in. Political communication matters because communications in every industry exists and it is very important to have, especially in politics. My preliminary impression of political communication is that it is the kind of communication needed for politicians to be successful in their different political campaigns, etc.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:

In the political communications page of Wikipedia, I would have to say that the introductory line of the page does inform its readers what this article is going to be about. The introductory line of the lead section is brief and concise and tells its readers what they are going to be reading about.

After evaluating the lead section of this article, I would say that the brief description of the article's major sections is only covered when discussing about defining the concept when it comes to political communications. Besides that, the rest of the lead section of this article, highlights the history of political communications and how it has changed over the years.

I think after evaluating this article and the information that is presented in it, I would have to say that probably the brief history of political communication and how it has changed over the years in the lead section of the article, might not actually be necessary. I say that the brief history overview of political communications might not actually be necessary for this article because the history of political communications is not even covered in the rest of the article.

Personally, I think that the lead section of this article is concise and to the point. The beginning sentence of the article tells you what you are reading about and what political communications actually is, in case someone who is learning about political communications and decides to read this article is more aware of what it is. The only part of the lead that I might consider it overly detailed is when the article starts discussing the brief history political communications and how it has changed over the years. I think that this part of the lead section might not actually be needed, unless there is a benefit to it that I just haven't been able to notice at this point in evaluating the article.

Content:

Looking at the article's content, I would have to say that everything is relevant. However, with that being said, I would look into updating the contemporary examples of strategic political communications as it is a bit outdated and more recent examples from the United States and Canada could be used. In regards to the content being up-to-date, as previously mentioned, the section discussing contemporary examples of strategic political communications could be updated. For content that doesn't belong, I would have to say that maybe the roles of social media in political communications might not be necessary. Yes, social media plays a big role in how we view of a lot of our political debates and whatnot, however, I think this section of the content deserves its own article on Wikipedia (perhaps a section under the social media article of Wikipedia?) Throughout this article of political communications, I'd have to say that this Wikipedia article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps and does not address the historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Tone and Balance:

Looking at the article and the content that is in there, it can be seen that the article is written in a neutral point of view. I think that in regards to the topic of political communications, it might be hard to write an article with a biased view. The claims that I might consider heavily biased towards a particular position, I might consider the contemporary examples of strategic political communications when the writer discusses the different examples from the United States that have been done. I can guarantee that there have been some examples of strategic political communications that have taken place in Canada and other countries as well that the writer could have also used. No, after evaluating this article there were no viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented. After reading this article, it is obvious that no minority or fringe view points were used throughout this article. In addition, it is clear that any of the writers in this article are trying to persuade a reader in favour of a certain position.

Sources and References:

Looking at the references list that is on this article's page, I would have to say that the article is in fact backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. In addition, I would say that the sources that are included in the reference list do reflect on the available literature on the topic as many of the references are books and journals that are based on the topic of political communication. I would have to say that out of the list of 16 sources that are listed for this type of an article, there are only three references that are currently not up to date. The rest of the references that are used for this article span out between the years of 2013-2019. When clicking on the links that are provided in the references list, 9 of the links actually work, while the other 6 do not.

Organization and writing quality:

After reading this article, I would say that it is clear and easy to read, however, throughout the article there is some spelling errors. The organization of the article could be improved as well. An example of this would be when the article discusses contemporary strategic political communications and moves right into the role of social media. I think personally that there could have been a better way to transit into these two topics.

Images and Media:

No images or media were used in this article.

Talk Page Discussion:

On the discussion page in regards to this topic, there are individuals talking about changing the section on social media. For this section of the article, the individual discussing this topic states that they are going to be deleting some of the work and then taking the time to expand on it more. The individual also states that they are also a student learning how to use Wikipedia as well. It seems that the role of social media in political communications is a big topic and a lot of people have been taking the time to edit and expand on the topic in this article. In regards to the articles WikiProjects, the article is a part of the following WikiProjects: Politics, Media and Telecommunications.

Overall Impressions:

The article's overall status is currently a level 5 vital article in the Society. In addition, Wikipedia has stated that this is a Start Class article. The article's strengths would have to be the kind of information that it provides readers in the lead section about what political communications is exactly. In regards to the article's weaknesses, I think that the article's organization and the sections of the actual article itself can be improved. I personally feel like there are many other topics at hand that can be discussed when it comes to political communications. Looking at the article of political communications, I feel like the article is currently underdeveloped. I feel like with a few more edits and more sections with more references added, this article could be well developed eventually.