User:Marsolf/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Visual rhetoric

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I've chosen this article because I'm interested in multimodal communication/composition for educational purposes. I also have a BS in Social Communication with a concentration in Advertising, which makes me an enthusiastic for studying and researching visual literacy as ways for a)aiding comprehension, b)enhacing understading, c)calling attention, d)being inclusive as a more "universal" literacy than language in print alone,e)adding more appeal to alphabetical texts.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: this section is concise, presents major sections but it lacks more examples and clarity when it comes to the definition of the term Visual Rhetoric. For example, the following definition, found later in the article, could appear in the lead section to provide a clearer definition for the topic: “in order for artifacts or products to be conceptualized as visual rhetoric, they must be symbolic, involve human intervention, and be presented to an audience for the purpose of communicating”, followed by some examples.

Content: The Graffiti section address this kind of visual rhetoric that represents marginalized populations.

Tone and balance: Neutral point of view throughout.

Sources and References: I believe there are stronger    sources available, especially for the Lead section when the topic is     introduced. Most of the information in the introductory section is linked    to the Purdue website. Reference 10, which is the book “Defining Visual Rhetoric”    should be relied on more heavily in both lead and history and origin     sections, to provide the reader a more reliable source to conceptualize     the term Visual Rhetoric and facilitate understanding for the rest of the     article. Most of the links work.

Images and Media: For an article that talks about visuals I found it is currently    very poorly incremented with images. It could use more straight-forward    examples that are explained in the text to illustrate some points, such as     in the Semiotics section. I guess the traffic light sign may be a universal     example but the STOP sign would narrow the meaning to US contexts. Images    should be more universal and more appealing. For example, a more quality    traffic light picture is in order. The one used is not very appealing,    does not reflect a real-life traffic light and seems like a paintbrush     drawing (the green light is just the circumference!).

Overall Impressions: I have some suggestions on how this article can be improved. It feels to me that it is not very complete. For example, “Visual rhetoric mainly involves the use of images.” This sentence could be further elaborated, especially if linked to a reliable source. Some repetition could be used for readability and some paragraphs could be more developed, for example, “The term emerged largely as an effort to set aside a certain area of study that would focus attention on specific rhetorical elements of visual mediums.” I did not understand the point of this sentence. It lacks a follow-up sentence.

“The study of visual symbols from a rhetorical perspective also has grown with the emerging recognition that such symbols provide access to a range of human experience not always available through the study of discourse.” I guess that terms like multimodality and/or multiliteracies could have a space in the subsections or within the article because both help conceptualize the definition.

The following sentence could be worded better, especially to support the claim for representing marginalized groups and going beyond Greeco-Roman standards and viewpoints: “Originating in ancient Greece, rhetoric has been widely discussed for thousands of years”. According to our recent class readings and discussion on Enheduanna, we’ve come to know that the concept of rhetoric may have originated before the Greeks. Bringing this into question may support our claim of valuing marginalized authors and expanding the views to non-euro-centric populations and authors, for example, the goddess and princess of Eastern lands. Maybe the term rhetoric was originated in Greece but not rhetorical movements. This part here should include other rhetoricians beyond Greeks.

Comments from Dr. Vetter
Hello and thanks you for your work on this evaluation. I think you've done a nice job presenting a nuanced task on the article, i.e. one that is both critical of where the article can be improved and aware of its strengths.

You have listed at least 3 sentences/passages where the article could be improve. I agree with you on all three of these cases. I would also encourage you to look for new content/sections to add by reading and researching about visual rhetorics in other secondary sources. If you check out the talk page, there are 2-3 other editors who have listed sources that might be useful in adding to they article.

Finally, I think we can do some re-organization of the article. For instance, why is "Graffiti" subsection in the same section as "How to Rhetorically Analyze an Image" - I'm actually wondering if that latter section should even be included.

Good work overall! Dr. Vetter (talk) 12:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)