User:Mayxiii/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Internet meme

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose to evaluate the Internet meme article because I have some familiarity with the concept of internet memes. The article being corrected matters because internet memes is a living artifact of internet history. My first impression was a bit confused, the images selected for the article were irrelevant to the overall article.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section


 * The first sentence does a fair job at explaining exactly what an internet meme is today.
 * The lead glosses over the current articles major section for a brief history in the formation of an internet meme. The third paragraph is confusing and the first sentence seems to be someones opinion about a meme vs an internet meme. The overall lead does not connect with the article.
 * Gives examples like planking which is not in the article
 * The lead is concise but focuses on irrelevant details about the article, ie: the discourse of what is considered a meme, examples of a fad, and references planking

Content


 * The sections on copyright seems out of place and irrelevant to the topic. Marketing is also an irrelevant section.
 * The content is up to date with the Modern section
 * The by context section has major content gaps. The culture subsection with religion and gender each only has one sentence, compared to the seven paragraphs of the politics section.
 * The article does a poor job at presenting underrepresented groups seen with the by context section and there being only one sentence about gender.

Tone and Balance


 * There is somewhat a neutral tone however the content being shared and described in the modern memes section is not neutral. Many statements were a blanket statements.
 * The whole article favored "humorous memes" and cited obscure reddit memes, especially in the modern meme section. In the copyright section, only disclosed the copyright laws in the US and India (however I believe that whole section should not be in the article ).
 * Humor memes are overly represented, as well as political memes.
 * No fringe group is established within the article
 * In the Marketing section, article seems to persuade readers that corporations profiting off of memes are bad.

Sources


 * There are many "facts" not properly backed my reliable sources. The article is littered with statements without citations and with connecting sources in order to form a narrative. Specific examples include the 4th paragraph in the evolution and propagation section, sentences within the 3rd and 4th paragraph in the origins and early memes section, 1st and 2nd paragraph in the modern memes section, the marketing section's 1st and 2nd paragraphs, the 1st and 6th paragraphs of politics in by context, as well as the 2nd paragraph in social movements.
 * Most sources are fairly current with primary sources ranging from 2000 to 2020
 * Sources are written by a vary of different authors, however, sources are lacking underrepresented groups. Instead of using https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/dank-memes to describe what a "dank" meme is, the article could use this source.
 * All links seem to be working properly

Organization and writing quality


 * The article is easy read and concise, however, it is very narrative driven
 * To my knowledge, their is no grammar or spelling errors
 * The history section is not formatted logically as the subsection of modern memes, irony and absurdism, and short-form video should not be in history.
 * Those subsections can make up another section dedicated to their title

Images and Media


 * None of the 5 images adds additional clarity to the article
 * The image in modern memes and irony and absurdism sections have good captions.
 * All 5 images are not cited properly.
 * The layout of the images are aesthetically centered.

Talk Page Discussion


 * The talk page seems friendly and civil with people directly stating there changes and why
 * There is a conversation between humor being a characteristic of internet meme, turning internet meme into the definition of a meme


 * The article is rated a C-Class. The WikiProjects about Internet Culture, Internet, and Comedy as top-importance to get the article fix.
 * Discussion's on the talk page are very similar to what was discussed in the wikiedu tutorial, I would say that it is more informal than originally assumed.

Overall Impressions


 * The bones of the article are present, however, there is filler content (such as the copyright and macro images) that can be removed from the article. I believe the a fuller explanation on internet memes is needed and less of the examples of memes. The C-Class rating is appropriate.
 * The article is good at referring to the humorous side of internet memes and sticking to the cultural relevance of present day memes.
 * The article can improve on the amount of blanket statements it provides, which then turn the article into a narrative piece. It should not write about internet memes as a source for humor. It should also cut down on the amount of examples provided.
 * The article is underdeveloped on the internet meme as a whole because it refers to the internet meme as an interchangeable entity with the meme.