User:Lucille-494

Topic Media Manipulation

Media manipulation

Everything int he article seems relevant to the topic and makes sense in the order it in written in. One thing that distracts me is that under the context it describes the word. While this is useful I also this it can be distracting too. The different sections in the article have a good start/ base to them. I think that more can be added or just to go more in-depth with the information to help those get a better understanding. Other than that this does a great job a defining words and giving explanations of what is being said.

Much of the information is from 3 to 4 years ago. With this being about the media I think that the information and resources should be updated. One think that can be improved is the examples given throughout the article. They are also from years passed and there could be better examples from just the past year or month.

The article seems to be neutral with its information. It does not seem to favor a side or have a biased opinion with the subject or the different categories.

Like mentioned before the resources and the citations are from 2016. These all could be looked over again and possibly updated. i have had no trouble accessing the different websites that were used. Majority of the websites that are used for this article are from New York Times and I feel like there could be more variety in where information is being found.

On the talk page most of the other editors talk about what they contributed to the page and why they did it. Also seen on the talk page is that this is used for a WikiProject.