User:Lscar99/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Visual communication (Visual communication )

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose Visual Communication because it seemed really interesting to me. When I am thinking of the word 'communication', the world visual does not come to mind. This topic in particular matters because it is important to know that our communication isn't always only through non verbals or actually speaking, it can be through other channels also including visual. When I first saw the visual part of this type of communication, I wasn't sure what was meant by that. which is why I picked it, purely out of curiosity.

Evaluate the article
Within the lead, the authors of this wiki page did a great job on the lead in my opinion. It has a lot of information in it, but also gets straight to the point of the title. Although, in parts a-little bit repetitive sounding. Great content here, again very detailed in where and how visual communications can/should be used along with people who have made it what it is today. I am not seeing anything that truly doesn't belong in here. It to me in a very balanced article. There is nothing really to argue about within this article it is more of facts of visual communication and how it works/has worked in the past. Politics in an article can tend to be alittle bit more one sided, but this seems fine. Some of the links and references in this article date back to 2002, which was a very long time ago so they are dated, but the ones I have clicked on work so far work fine. But, there is a pop up at the top saying the citations need to be updated. It is a well written and well organized article. No gramatical or spelling errors that I have seen so far. It is broken down into sections with sub bullet points that are bolded making it easy to read and understand. The images are lacking, as there is only one image for the social media section, it could have been done much better. But, considering the date it is fine. On the talk page, Although I am not too familiar with it yet, but I am not seeing any comments going on. This article is apart of Wikiproject Graphic Design, WikiProject Media, and Wikiproject Systems and it is rated with "High-Performance". My overall impression of this article is that it is very well put together and easy to read, although it seems that there could be so much more information that has never been added.