User:Nlutt008/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: Visual Communication
I chose to evaluate this article because I am very interested in different types of communication, such as non-verbal, face-to-face, symbolic, etc. I have never fully focused on visual side of communication, so I believe that by evaluating this article, I can learn more about the different visual communication techniques and improve the Wikipedia page for other readers.

Lead

Guiding questions

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?

Lead evaluation

The lead describes visual communication in a way that is easy to understand. By reading the first sentence, I am able to understand the basic concept of visual communication. The lead does list different types of visual communication; however, it does not list any of the articles major sections. Also, there is not much focus on the various types of visual communication techniques listed in the lead. In general, the lead is very concise and gives a simple description of the topic.

Content

Guiding questions

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?

Content evaluation

All of the major sections are relevant to the topic of visual communication. There have been many edits in 2020, so the information must be up-to-date; however, there is only a small section regarding social media. I believe that, with the increase of social media use, there should be more information regarding that since it is very relevant today. There is a lot of visual communication on social media due to marketing, branding, organizational presence, etc. There is very little information on the historical use of visual communication; there is one sentence that states that it goes back thousands of years, but there is a lot of information that could be added in terms of the history and how it was used in the past.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

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?

Tone and balance evaluation

After reading the article, it seems to be neutral. There are no claims that were biased towards either one side or the other; it is informational. This article is not trying to persuade me in either one way or the other. It informed me on what visual communication is and the variety of ways in which it is used.

Sources and References

Guiding questions

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?

Sources and references evaluation

There seems to be a lack of citations in this article. There is a lot of information that is included in the article that I would be unable to trace back to a valid source. A big percentage of the sources at the bottom of the article are not very recent. There is one from 2018, but the rest seem to be from 2010 or even earlier. There is an even split between web resources (i.e. websites) and written resources (i.e. books). A few links gave me an "error" or a "the page you are looking for cannot be found" message. Also, some of the resources used in this article did not look very reliable.

Organization

Guiding questions

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?

Organization evaluation

The article is very easy to read and understand. I did not run into any sections that did not make sense. I did not spot any obvious grammar/spelling mistakes while going over the article. It has a lot of headings and subheadings that make the article organized and easy to understand. There is not a whole lot of information under those headings, but the article is clear and easy to navigate.

Images and Media

Guiding questions

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?

Images and media evaluation

There are only three images used in this Wikipedia article. I believe that there could have been more to show examples of the different types of visual communication techniques. Each image has a caption, but they are very short and informal. All three images that are used are from the Wikipedia Commons. I cannot really see a relation between the information beside the image and the images. They seem to just be places on the page without a connection to what is being explained.

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions

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?

Talk page evaluation

There have been a few recent comments included on the talk page, but there is not much on there. It is rated a Start-Class, and it is a part of WikiProjects. I would be willing to develop this page throughout the class because I think it could be really interesting. It also seems to be a part of the Wiki Education Foundation and created by a student.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions

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?

Overall evaluation

I believe the article is a great starting point and needs to be improved. It has a good organized structure for someone to further develop. If I were to work on this article, I would add more recent and relevant information to further increase the knowledge people could gain from this article. I believe it is fairly underdeveloped for such a broad topic, but it is a good start.

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: