User:Paulaacocal/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Hate-watching

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 have chosen to evaluate this article because it is an example of a viewer's relationship to media. This matters because it can be a way to understand how audiences relate to a show. I thought that it was rather a small article but I also remembered that hate-watching is a relatively new terms that emerged in the early 2000s. --~

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.)

The lead section of the article is short and concise. It defines the topic and expands on its meaning. The content of the article is matches the subject and provides a perspective in which readers can understand the concept of hate-watching even more. They have a section called "relation with anti-fan culture" and this helps to inform us of the term's background.The tone is neutral and straight-to-the point. There is no opinion about hate-watching, and rather presents hate-watching in relation to its topic of television. The viewpoints are well balanced and there is no explicit leaning towards one perspective. There is a diversity of sources, ranging from different fields such as psychology to media studies. There was a bit of a heavy dependence on journals such as HuffPost and The New Yorker that delved into specific shows but this did not impede the actual content section. The organization of the article was good; there were three specific sections and each kept to the topic..There were no images and media and the talk page discussion was very empty. The article is somewhat strong; it's lack of content appears to be its weakest point but one can understand the novelty of the term may have contributed to this.--~