User:Robert.darragh/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Media bias in the United States)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
There were a couple of reasons that motivated me to chose this article to pick for my first evaluation. The first reason why I was compelled to pick this article was because of the topic its self. Media bias is something I have been studying in two of my other classes so when I saw this article title "Media Bias in the United States" I felt like it was destiny. Another reason for why I chose this article is because It was on a long list of

articles given to us by our teacher and it stuck out to me out of all the other ones because of the impact it has on my current life. Lastly after reading this article and dissecting its main

points the authors were trying to make and the overall objective I felt like it was the perfect article to choose.

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 articles opening sentence or grabber is “Media bias in the United States occurs when US media outlets skew information, such as reporting news in a way that conflicts with standards of professional journalism or promoting a political agenda through entertainment media” I would argue that this doe clearly describes the topic of the article although it could have been said in a much more detailed and also detailed way.
 * The lead of this article does include multiple brief descriptions of the major sections that will be addressed. For instance, they state the main media bias in the US lean towards targeting the two political, Conservative, or liberal perspectives.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.) The lead does not cover ideas, information, and or facts that are not stated in this article.
 * The lead in this article is one of the best pieces of written work within the article itself. It is concise and straight to the point only taking up four lines and providing the reader with a detailed overlook of what they can expect.

Content

 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? YES, I do beehive this article does a great job staying on track and providing only information that is relevant to the main topic at hand which is Media Bias in the US.
 * Is the content up-to-date? YES. This content is in fact up to date lastly being edited 12 days ago.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? YES,  I do think there is some content missing. It talks about Media Bias in the US and how political views are the main motive behind the Bias. Yet the article could do a better job addressing and giving examples of Media groups that are notoriously biased. That is what I believe to be missing.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? YES,  I believe the article does deal with one of Wikipedia’s Equity gaps. For this article is kept up to date with relevant links to strengthen its credibility among people in the community. It seems like fairness is being provided in this article among its editors.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the article neutral? YES, for this article covers both sides of political views and the main point is addressing media Biases so it would be ironic for it to be biased.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? NO
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? NO
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? YES,  I believe the article does a great job of this stating it a few times.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, and YES.  I mean I don't think this articles main goal is to persuade the reader one way or another, but it is laying out important information in order for the reader once there done to make a decision on their own of how they feel about the media in the US.

Sources and References
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * 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.)
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? YES, this article is concise, clear and easy to read. It has great flow and is easy to break down the main points.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No none that I could find or Grammarly.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? YES, I actually think this was the main thing the article did exceptionally well. It has a clear start and end point and for what it hopes to cover and what they want to educate you on.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? YES, This article provides charts, graphs, and other images that only help enhance the reader's understanding of the topic or main points.
 * Are images well-captioned?  YES, the images or graphs provide a detail description on the information provided.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? YES
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? NO honestly the images feel kind of hidden and definitely do not catch the reader's eye. In fact I did not see the images until the second time I read the article.

Talk page discussion
The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?  The conversations that are going on behind the scene about how to represent the topic are all pretty much similar. They all go on long rants about Media Biases in the US. A lot highlights how much worse it has gotten and gives long lengthy descriptions on what some of the Biases are or what's causing them.  A lot of them agree with the overall points of the article but really just love expanding on them and sharing their points or information that they found on the topic.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Both the article and WikiProjects are grated C-Class to Mid- Importance
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I think that the way Wikipedia discusses this topic that differs to how we would discuss it in class is that it brings up some points that we would never truly discuss or feel the need to cover. If Media Biases were to be discussed in class I feel like we would address it from a different angle. For instance, we would probably talk about our generation's main intake of media, and political views being projected by different accounts or sources.

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status? C- Class to Mid Importance
 * What are the article's strengths? Organization, credibility, sources, Neutral perspective
 * How can the article be improved? I think this article could be improved by being rewritten to grab the attention of the younger generations relating it more to there everyday life
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article scored a B in its development.