User:Mguzman09/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
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article to evaluate because the topic of how the way politics utilizes the different means of communication is interesting and allows me to share the different points of views that we have discussed in class thus far in the readings.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It does provide an introductory sentence that highlights what political communication is and what they are trying to convey on the WikiPage.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The opening description talks about political communication but it does not dive deeper into what the rest of the Wiki page will discuss. There is a table of contents that is at the top of the page but not written in the description.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? There are ways that we can reduce the amount of information but still provide the information that is relevant to the topic.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes it is relevant.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes. There is additional content that can be added.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? We could add additional content to add to the Wiki page to add information to describe and showcase what is Political Communication and examples of what impacts it has.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? There seems to be some examples that are shared about Political Communication and it could be seen as biased.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? When the mention of the "Bush Administration" that could be seen as biased. It is important that we do not have any type of bias on Wiki pages because it does not allow for someone to read and think that this page is biased to one direction.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Yes we need to showcase and discuss the impact of pollination communication as an entirety.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? I do not think that it is trying to persuade anyone but just showcasing examples of how political communication is utilized over the years and more in our modern time.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes all fo the information and citations are coming from reliable sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they are.
 * Are the sources current? Yes they are.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they do. We can add additional cites throughout that look like might be missing and also look at ways to connect more of these to other Wiki pages.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? There is potential for it to be a little more concise.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No spelling errors but we can potentially cut down on a few things in order for it to be concise.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? There are different sections but I would like to see a better breakdown of the sections and some sections should have more information and more meat to read.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes it does. This is a good start to the framework of political communication and it could continue to be edited by individuals to make it better.
 * Are images well-captioned? There are no images on the Wiki page.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There are no images on the Wiki page.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There are no images on the Wiki page.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There are conversations on editing the Wiki page based on the format. Adding more information that is lacking that could be added and removed to make the page more relevant.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This page is rated as a Start-Class which means that there is a lot of work that can be done to make this page better.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This topic is relevant to the way that we are talking about how politics live within social media and so I can see adding information to that section of political communication because it goes hand in hand to what we have discussed in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article's overall status is that it is published and available to be found.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article does a good job on framing what political communication is and explaining it to someone that does not know much about it.
 * How can the article be improved? The article can add more information on how social media and the impact that is have on political communication.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I feel like the article is somewhat well-developed. I understand the point of view and where the author is trying to do but I think it misses the mark on how it is structured and the amount of information that could be added to sections like Social Media.

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