Cry Me a River....or a Stream (Short Assignment # 5)

Before I even began reading the articles regarding Marshall McLuhan and Michelle Citron, the first difference I noticed was length then depth. Marshall McLuhan’s article was noticeably longer, not just longer than Michelle Citron’s but I am almost positive longer than any Wikipedia article I have ever read.  The author of his article goes into great depth with a very comprehensive and interested tone.  A reader unfamiliar with McLuhan would definitely get a great gist about who he was, so I think the author of this article definitely accomplished in writing a good Wikipedia article.

Michelle Citron’s article is incredibly short and doesn’t go into great depth at all about her accomplishments; her article is only accredited 7 citations, while McLuhan’s has 83.  At first glance, I thought the author of this article may have not have fully done his/her research or not have that much interest in the topic, but then after further reading, I realized that Michelle Citron is still alive, so she is still creating works, while Marshall McLuhan has been deceased, so his life works are being celebrated.

Before I chose a featured article, I wanted to know why an article would be chosen to be featured by Wikipedia.  It said they are “determined to be the best articles…[and] are used as examples” according to Wikipedia editors and they encompass “accuracy, neutrality, completeness, and style.”  The featured article I chose to analyze was “Cry Me a River (Justin Timberlake song).  At first glance I was astonished; the length and majority of content looked as if it would be an article about Justin Timberlake himself, not just one of his songs!  Its accuracy is amazing; it gives facts and information I never knew, such as that the song was written about his past relationship with Britney Spears, and Taylor Swift is one of the artists who covered his song.  I know this information is accurate, because it is cited.  The article definitely exercises neutrality and simply just states the facts about the song; it never compares it to another song to explain why “Cry Me a River” is better or worse.  The articles completeness is amazing; it goes into detail about “composition and lyrical interpretation,” “reception and accolades,” “commercial performance,” “music video,” “live performance and cover versions” (these serve as some of the sub-headers).