User:YallyZoo/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The article that I chose was, "History of communication studies."

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because this class is based on the study of communications. So, I thought that it would be interesting to choose an article that focused on the overall history of Communications studies.

Evaluate the article
Lead section:

The lead section of this article was not a very good one. There was a warning banner concerning the lack of reliable in-text citations. The lead section could use a revision in order to really establish what the reader would be reading. It gave the definition of Communications Studies but did not cite where the definition came from.

Content:

The paragraphs in the context lacked citations. There is supposed to be at least one proper in-text citation per paragraph. There are gaps within the sourcing of this article.

Tone and balance:

The tone was neutral for the majority of this article. However, in the section titled "Germany," there were claims that did not back the statements made about people who were to be contributors to the history of communications studies. There was a good amount of balance between the information of each section in this article.

Sources and References:

This article has plenty of resources to support most of its information. But it lacks acceptable in-text citations.

Organization and writing quality:

This article was organized. It was explaining the development and progression of communication studies in each decade. The writing was clear and easy for me to understand. I did not catch any grammatical errors in this article.

Images and media:

There were no images provided directly in the article for me to see. In order to see an image, I had to hover or click on a link. This was the case for multiple sections of the article. These images were of institutions and people that have contributed to the history of communications studies.

Talk page discussion:

This article was involved in the wikiproject Media and in the ''Wikiproject Sociology. There was a total of three comments written on this article. The first one talked about how bad it was and the other two provided suggestions on how to make it better.''

Overall Impressions:

I think that this article was very informative. It can be improved in two ways. To provide proper in-text citations and to get straight to the point for each section of the topic. Each section is very lengthy.