User:Ranahuwais/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is it written neutrally?
 * Does each claim have a citation?
 * Are the citations reliable?
 * Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)?
 * Check out the article's Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page, too.

Option 1

 * Article title: Parasocial Interaction
 * Article Evaluation:
 * The article's information is in-depth and relating to the topic. It seems to be written neutrally, although its language is complicated and scientific. The layout of the information could also be improved to avoid redundancies and all-over-the-place flow. There are areas where citations and clarifications are needed, especially in later parts, but the sources used seem reputable and all scholarly. The content gap it covers isn't necessarily misrepresentation or underrepresentation of groups, but does cover content from the contemporary internet sphere, which is often misrepresented or oversimplified. The changes to be made on this article wouldn't need to be drastic, but it is one of the topics I'm most interested in.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 2

 * Article title: Visual Communication
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article's writing is clear and detailed, with plenty of theoretical and scholarly information and sources. There are various areas in need of better citations (or even citations to begin with). The language could be simplified, but the organization of information is clear and easy to follow.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 3

 * Article title: History of Newspaper Publishing
 * Article Evaluation
 * The article stands to be improved informationally and in its flow. It begins right away with information without much introduction, and its information is quite limited to Europe, where it claims newspapers were invented. This isn't true, and I'd like to expand its focus outside of the Western world. This would work towards closing the content gap of Eastern history which is often overlooked in favor of its western counterpart. Its writing style does seem neutral, but there are lots of moments where it claims things are the "most influential" or important, which suggest otherwise and need of fixing. Some entire sections like Korea and United States are reduced to a sentence and hyperlink to another article, and could easily be fleshed out. Judging by how much could be done to this source, this could be a great option for me.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 4:

 * Article title: Old Media
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is in desperate need of work. It spends about two paragraphs discussing old media generally before discussing New media and how it has challenged Old media. Much of the writing also reads as a persuasive essay, and could be made more neutral. Its sources aren't up to Wikipedia's standards either, being online newspaper articles or just generally very old. There's plenty that could be discussed on the subject, which leaves much room for improvement. However, because it is so lacking, it is a bit overwhelming, especially about a topic that I'm not all that passionate about.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 5

 * Article title: Payne Fund Studies (literally nothing here AND sources needed)
 * Article Evaluation
 * There is a ton to help with on this article. There is even less information here than on the Old Media page, with only two paragraphs to speak for it. It only cites twice in these two paragraphs, and one of them needs a citation. Its writing style is simple, but too monotonous in its sentence structure. Considering how important these studies were for early mass communication studies, it's a great contender. But, as I said about the Old Media page, it's an overwhelming amount.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources