User:Summrsfan10/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Political communication

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article to evaluate because I think political communication is an interesting topic. I am taking a class on an Intro to Comparative Politics and I have been enjoying that so far. I figured that these two topics were closely related, so I chose to look at this article.

Evaluate the article
The lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly describes the article's topic. The lead includes a brief description of the article's main sections. The lead does not include any points that were not mentioned in the article. The lead is concise and not overly detailed.

The article's content is relevant to the topic. The article's content is up to date for the most part. When I was scrolling through the talk page, one user suggested to write about how COVID-19 impacted political communications. That may be something that the editors might want to research in the future. This maybe would be considered "missing" content. Other than that, there is no missing content or content that doesn't belong. The article doesn't not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.

The article has a neutral tone. There are no claims that are heavily biased. There are some viewpoints that are underrepresented. I found it interesting how the article chose to focus in on the United States and the Middle East when giving examples of strategic political communication. There is a part about the United Nations, but that doesn't specifically cover the parts of the world that are left out of this discussion. Instead, there should be parts of the world like Africa and East Asia being talked about as well and their examples of strategic political communication. Minority viewpoints are described accurately.

All facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. The sources are thorough. The sources are relatively recent. Almost all of them come from this decade. The sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors. I couldn't find much better sources to explain the necessary information. The sources they currently use are good for the article. The links the article provides work.

The article is well written; it's easy to follow. The article has a grammatical error on the last sentence of the lead paragraph. Other than that, it doesn't have any spelling or grammatical errors. The article is well organized. There are heading describing what the following paragraphs will be about.

The article doesn't include any images that enhances the understanding of the topic. The only image featured is a picture of George W. Bush giving a speech in Georgia. This doesn't help the reader understand the topic of political communications any better. The image is well captioned and follow copyright policies.

There aren't many conversations going on about how to represent this topic better. As I mentioned before, there was a conversation about including information on how COVID-19 affected political communications across the world. There was also discussions about fixing the social media part of the article. Other than these examples, there aren't many discussions happening in the talk section of the article. The article is rated a level 5 vital article and is a part of wiki-projects.

The article is good overall, but it needs some more information on how political communication works in other parts of the world. The article is a bit underdeveloped. The article is nicely organized, concise, and easy to understand with its main points. Overall, this article isn't bad, but it could be developed a bit more than it is right now.