User:Nrea21/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_design

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This is a topic of my interest, however it seems to be missing a great amount of detail throughout. The video game industry is constantly building on top of itself, so there should be a great amount of information to add every year.

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
=Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Somewhat. =Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Goes over "sub-disciples" but it does not introduce "Game Elements" and other sections. =Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.) The lead includes a few sentences speaking in past terms, however there is no citation and this info is not found anywhere else in the article. =Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is a little jumbled in wording and unnecessary details.

Content
=Is the article's content relevant to the topic? All of the content appears to be relevant to Game Design. =Is the content up-to-date? Not really. This does not reflect the current field of game design in any way. =Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? It feels that there is a lot of content missing, with some sections only containing one sentence. =Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? This article does not seem to cover any historical information at all. The history of Game Design could perhaps be its own page, however, there is no reference to such a topic at all.

Tone and Balance
=Is the article neutral? There are words such as "polished well" and "impressive" that show a bias, as well as the inclusion of certain games that seem to add nothing to the content. =Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Personal Opinions sometimes appear in the content. =Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There is little representation in this article in many ways. =Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? No. =Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Somewhat.

Sources and References
=Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Not Entirely. Some are even missing any sort of citation. =Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? No, there is a great deal that can be added. =Are the sources current? Somewhat. There should be a lot more. =Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? There is about one-third of the references that appear to be sourced from the same 3-4 authors. =Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) Some articles are persuasive and do not hold deep analysis. =Check a few links. Do they work? They are a few that do not work.

Organization and Writing Quality
=Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? There could be better phrasing throughout the article. =Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Does not appear so. =Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Organized well into sections, but the many sections feel empty.

Images and Media
=Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are a few images included =Are images well-captioned? No. =Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes. =Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? They appear to be fine, visually.

Talk Page Discussion
=What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Conversation about mistakes on grammar and lack of back up on points. =How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? S-class. Yes it is part of WikiProject. =How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We have not exclusively covered this topic yet.

Overall Impressions
=What is the article's overall status? This article feels underdeveloped, especially in the lack of content included. =What are the article's strengths? Well organized sections. =How can the article be improved? More content, more references, tweaks on writing. =How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is underdeveloped, feels like a new article with a lack of updated content.