User:ZBTfui/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Communication studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this page because it is concerning the subject of my minor, Communication. It is a very important page because it discusses the study of how humans communicate which is an essential field of study to be familiar with. My immediate impression was that it seemed pretty bare and very narrow in its focus concerning the views of locations on the study. It only focused on the United States and Canada, but there is much more information to be reported with respect to how Communication Studies is viewed by the rest of the world.

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.)


 * The lead contains much more detail than the body of the article. Perhaps some of the details about the process of communication studies and its fields could be moved into the body?
 * It contains a lot of aspects of Communication Studies that is not expanded upon in the rest of the article.
 * This article only addresses the United States and Canadian populations, ignoring the rest of the world.
 * The article does appear to be neutrally toned, though one could argue that its focus on North American views of the study is implicit bias.
 * While many of the sources are solid, some reference nothing specific. Particularly sources 31 and 33-36 in references.
 * There are no images, even though they could enhance one's understanding of the topic.
 * The talk page is primarily centered around the conciseness of the information as well as the sparse amount of it, however there is very little in the way of conversation.
 * The article is rated Start-Class by the Media, Sociology, Linguistics, Philosophy, Literature, Science, and Writing WikiProjects.
 * Our discussion of communication in class is far more in-depth. It also focuses on a specific form of communication, while this provides a very broad view of the history of the study itself.
 * The article, in my opinion, is incredibly lacking given how important the subject-matter is.
 * It would benefit greatly from more information on the specific focuses in the field, such as the subcategories listed in the lead.
 * If one is going to focus on how regions view the study, it should certainly make it a priority to cover as many regions as possible.
 * This page does benefit from a thorough lead section, mentioning many potential useful sections of information. It also details many professional organizations that readers will find very helpful.
 * The article is certainly not complete, being poorly developed so far, but does have the foundation set for a thorough article on the subject.