User:Tuj81082/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Social media and suicide(link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it pertains to our course being that it is about technology and how it affects our society. I think social media highly influences our society whether that be positively and negatively. Suicide is something that has also been highly affected by social media, and I'm interested in updating this article on the subject.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead succinctly describes that the article discusses social media's influence on suicide. There is a brief overview of the subtopics which include social media risks, impact of pro-suicidal sites, cyberbullying, media contagion, suicide notes, and pacts. The lead gives accurate information of what is to be discussed throughout the article.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content within the article relates to the topic, however I believe certain aspects such as social media risks could be expanded on in more depth. I also think that due to certain topics being from 2011, I could update he data and research to what is most relevent. The beginning of the article briefly mentions the story of the first person to commit suicide on live social media, so I could work off of that and explain what is being done to prevent things like this from happening. I would additionally like to include more information about the way suicide is glorified by social media but also how social media is pushing to prevent suicide. The last topic I'd like to expand on is exactly what it is on social sites that are triggering suicidal thoughts and things related to suicide (anxiety, depression, etc.).


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

I think the main claim that appears biased is how the author wrote the article about how social media glorifies suicide. A better approach would be to expand on what can be done to prevent suicide as well as what exactly triggers it. These topics are glossed over and I feel as though more research can be put into the subject. There is a bias that social media promotes suicide, and I believe the article should include the positive affects these platforms can have and potentially how influencers have an effect as well.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * Although the article has credible sources, some of the references are out of date and an go as far back as to 2003. Some of the sources are current, as the lead includes references form 2020 and the article itself was last updated on September 13.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well-written and divided into sections that support the overall topic. It is very concise and gives the readers an acceptable explanation of topics.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article includes no images of the topic, which is something that can be expanded upon.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions
 * The talk page highlights a lot about how the references are not in the correct format. They also include how certain citation links are un-clickable or are incomplete. This article is a part of five wiki projects.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article does an exceptional job of keeping organized topics that relate to the subject. Room for improvement includes citations and images that are non-existent throughout the article. I would give this article a well-developed rating with room for improvement.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: