User:Lmlaux/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: (Political communication)
 * I chose to evaluate this article because I enjoy politics and am interested in the way that the media, candidates, and parties communicate with themselves and with the public.

Lead evaluation
The Lead very clearly states the topic and all that it entails. The Lead also includes a brief description of the article's major sections, but they are not named in the order in which they appear. It does not include information not present or elsewhere mentioned in the article. The Lead is not overly detailed but it seems like it could be put in a better order.

Content evaluation
All of the article's content is relevant to the topic and the many other topics it connects to. The content is very recent, featuring information on political communication through social media. However, there is no history of political communication included.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is extremely neutral and appears to have no biased, despite involving politics. I think that there could be more examples listed under "Contemporary examples of strategic political communication" as there is only one currently listed. It details a campaign under the Bush Administration, so I think the article could use an example from a Democratic administration to represent their party as well. The article doesn't attempt to persuade the reader in favor of any positions.

Sources and references evaluation
All facts in the article are cited from reliable sources. They are current and reflect a variety of voices on the topic. The oldest source is only from 1990. I checked links for political marketing, a Wikipedia link for interdisciplinary, and the Lead definition of political communication and both were accurate.

Organization evaluation
The article is very easy to read and well organized. I did not find a singular grammatical or spelling error. Each section is clearly defined and concise, and makes sense organizationally. The give sections make the topic seem very easy to understand and specific.

Images and media evaluation
The article does not include images that enhance understanding of the topic or depict anything mentioned. The only graphic featured is a poll box with a vote being put into it from 2012 that looks like ClipArt. It's near the Lead section, and while it does adhere to the copyright regulations of Wikipedia, it does not explain or elaborate on anything mentioned. It seems irrelevant to the topic, although it fits nicely where it is placed.

Talk page evaluation
The most recent conversation on the Talk page is a Wikipedian explaining their edits, and it was published in May 2019. There is a question from May 2008 that is unanswered and another user's editing plans from April 2019. It is part of three WikiProjects: WikiProject Politics, WikiProject Media, and WikiProject Telecommunications. We have not discussed political communication in class yet, but I imagine it is cohesive with what we will discuss when politics come up.

Overall evaluation
The article is rated Start-class in all WikiProject categories, and High-importance in the WikiProject Politics category. The status of the article is solid and well-planned. I think that the article is direct, concise, and well organized. However, it is missing any mention of the history of political communication, an opposing example of strategic political communication, and relevant images or media. It could be improved by adding all three of the aforementioned, and by listing more examples that aren't just recent occurrences. I would say it is well-developed, but still has room for improvement to be extremely polished.

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: Talk:Political communication