User:SparksCap95/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I will be evaluating the (currently) C-class article called Audio game.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it relates to accessibility in leisure activities, particularly by making games more accessible to those who are blind or visually impaired. It also relates to CSCW as some audio games feature multiplayer play modes.

Evaluate the article
 Lead Section 

The lead includes an introductory sentence that briefly describes what an audio game is. It does include a brief overview of major sections in the article while not discussing information that is not present in the article. The lead is fairly concise, but could benefit from a bit of a lack of redundancy in terms of describing devices that the games can be played on.

 Content Section 

The article's content is relevant to the topic, as each paragraph relates to the subject of audio games. However, the content has not been kept up-to-date, with the most recent reference being from 2016 and most references being from 2008. While there is not any content that does not belong, the article is missing the inclusion of more recent audio games such as the audio games featured on the Amazon Alexa.

 Tone and Balance 

The article is written in a neutral tone, with no claims that appear to be heavily biased towards a certain perspective. As far as I am aware, there are no viewpoints that are overrepresented, but it seems that a viewpoint that is underrepresented is the reception of these games by people who are actually visually impaired. The article only seems to emphasize the viewpoint of a developer who is not part of the visually impaired community. There is no description of minority or fringe viewpoints in the article, and it does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

 Sources and References 

The majority, but not all, of the facts are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. However, the sources are not thorough, and could use more academic articles. Additionally, the sources are not very current, with the most recent being from 2016. The sources appear to come from a fairly diverse spectrum of authors, but it seems they are lacking resources from the visually impaired community. There are better sources available, such as academic articles that would be better to include than some of the random personal websites currently on the page. All of the links do appear to work.

 Organization and Writing Quality 

The article is well-written in terms of clarity and conciseness, and it is easy to understand. There are no flagrant grammar or spelling errors. Additionally, the article is well-organized with major sections, but could use an update to its content to be more relevant for today.

 Images and Media 

The article includes two images that enhance understanding of the topic, but I think there is plenty of room for one or two additional ones. The images are well-captioned to enhance understanding of the topic and laid out in a visually appealing way. Both of the current images appear to follow Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

 Talk Page Discussion 

On the talk page, there are discussions about enhancing the clarity of the history timeline, coming up with a Wikipedia category for these types of games, and a prior image copyright problem. The article is rated C-class, and it is part of the Video games WikiProject. The way Wikipedia discusses this topic is different than how we have talked about it in-class because it is a bit outdated (with the most recent Talk page discussion occurring in 2008) and does not include the reception of the audio games by people who are actually visually impaired.

 Overall Impressions 

This C-class article is a great start to overviewing the topic, but could benefit from more recent information in terms of examples. Additionally, including academic articles and perspectives from those in the visually impaired community would also help to improve the article and make it more thorough. Perhaps there are also relevant statistics that would enhance the article as well, along with more visuals of types of technology that offer audio games.

Below this line was an article I reviewed before fully understanding the assignment.

Which article are you evaluating?
I will be evaluating the (currently) C-class article called videotelephony.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it directly correlates to CSCW now more than ever. As a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic, videoconferencing technology experienced a rapid increase in use and changed the way work is viewed today. Employees can use videoconferencing calls to set up important meetings worldwide that would not be possible otherwise. Being able to video chat with others across the globe, and even share screens, improves work efficiency and team communication in collaborative projects.

Evaluate the article
 Lead Section 

The first sentence of the article provides a clear and brief explanation of what videotelephony is, while also providing synonyms for the term. While not done explicitly, the lead does reference the topics covered by the article's most significant sections. The lead does not include information that is not referred to later in the article, and is fairly concise at 3 paragraphs for how large the article is.

 Content Section 

All of the content is relevant to the topic of videotelephony. The article is mostly up-to-date, as it does include information about the effects of the pandemic and the rise of Zoom. However, the Impact section is the most outdated, as it includes statistics from 2015 and 2010 regarding mobile video calls that likely are irrelevant, especially after the rise of this technology in recent years. Additionally, the latest reference to the usefulness of videoconferencing in CSCW is dated back in 2013, so this could be updated with a much more recent and relevant example. The article does relate to one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, and it includes an extensive overview of how this technology can aid the underrepresented group of the deaf and hard of hearing.

 Tone and Balance 

The article is neutral and does an excellent job of conveying the facts without being heavily biased towards a specific position. The article does highlight the viewpoint that this technology is useful, but it also discusses its critiques, such as security and interpersonal concerns. Minority viewpoints are accurately described throughout the article, as the text mentions what some people argue. By providing a balanced discussion of videotelephony that includes both its pros and its cons, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader into adopting a particular viewpoint.

 Sources and References 

The majority of the facts are backed by reliable sources of information, but the Technology section is noticeably missing references of any kind. A quick look at the 105 sources for this article shows that they are thorough, coming from a wide variety of reputable material. However, they are not super current, with only two coming from 2022 and the majority originating in 2017 or earlier. The many sources are written by a diverse set of authors, and include historically marginalized individuals. Most of the sources come from peer-reviewed articles, textbooks, and studies, so it is unlikely that there are better sources available. After testing a few links, it does appear that they work correctly.

 Organization and Writing Quality 

The article is well-written and easy-to-read with no flagrant grammatical or spell errors. It is reasonably broken down into sections that help guide the reader through the main points of the topic.

 Images and Media 

The article includes many images that help the reader better understand the article, especially regarding how the technology looked in the past. All of the images are well-captioned and abide by Wikipedia's copyright regulations. The images are incorporated into the article in a visually appealing way.

 Talk Page Discussion 

Behind-the-scenes, there are many discussions on articles that can be merged with this one (for example, with the videophone, videoconferencing, and Modern Sign Language Communication articles).

This article is currently rated C-class but noted to be vital. It is part of two WikiProjects: Telecommunications and Disability.

Whereas in class we have looked at videotelephony mainly in terms of videoconferencing in terms of CSCW and improving teamwork, the conversations on this talk page discuss how videotelephony includes other applications as well. They also discuss the potential environmental impacts of the technology.

 Overall Impressions 

While this article is currently rated C-class, I think it is off to a good start in terms of moving up in rating. Strengths of this article include its well-balanced overview of the topic, the inclusion of a wide variety of sources and images that aid in the reader's understanding, and grammar. However, the article can be improved through inclusion of sources in the Technology section, as well as with the inclusion of more recent sources overall. A further discussion on more recent applications would be beneficial. Thus, I think this article well-written, but it is underdeveloped and could greatly benefit from an update.

 References