Talk:User personas
Length: This current draft is great, and does a good job of allocating the right amount of space in a way that allows each section to stand on its own. Although it currently only stands at around 1700 words, all of the sections have been flushed out, and it is clear to see how the eventual 3000 words will be reached.
Structure: In regards to the structure of this article, the opening paragraph accurately and succinctly captures exactly what a user persona is, why it is important in the field of human-computer design, and the potential implications of misusing them. I think a little more could have been included in regards to the ethical concerns, as the one sentence about stereotypes and classifications doesn’t fully capture everything that you end up talking about in the later section.
The body also does a great job of breaking down into important components, starting with the history of user personas and then moving into the different steps of the creation process, the alternative data-driven persona, benefits, and finally the varying ethical concerns surrounding user personas. The history section identifies the issue that led to its inception, and explains how software designer Alan Cooper was able to provide a solution to this need. One thing about this section is that you identify his book as The Inmates are Running the Asylum in the second paragraph and cite it properly, however the first paragraph also mentions an unidentified first book and does not cite it. Aside from that, this paragraph flows nicely and leads into the next section very well.
In regards to the creative process section, I think that while it portrays the information effectively, a couple more things can be done to improve how understandable it is to the average reader who may not be familiar with user personas. For example, you include pictures in the benefits section, and I believe that the creative process section can also benefit from having pictures to serve as aide for the information you are getting across. Additionally, for the “Demographic Profile” section, you can potentially incorporate the quotation boxes to really make your example descriptions stand out. Also, I’m not sure if there is anything more to say about your End Goals and Scenario, but you can fill your word count by including more examples as you did with demographic profile.
References are good for the most part, however there are spaces in which the citations are missing or incorrectly formatted, such as the missing book in the first paragraph of the history section, or the last paragraph of Algorithmic Persona Creation where Sorting Things Out is referred to but not correctly cited.
Clarity: From the current draft, it is clear what the potential ethical issues are surrounding user personas. The introduction hints at it, however the article goes into a deeper dive in the Ethical Concerns section, detailing the concerns surrounding Algorithmic persona creation and Designer bias. It is clear that this is an ethical issue of importance, however the Ethical Concerns section may benefit from real examples of times where this has happened, as well as flushing out Designer Bias a bit more.
Objective Reporting: In regards to the tone used throughout the article, I would say that it was very neutral, objectively stating concerns without any outright support or condemnation of the current methods used in user persona modeling. This neutral reporting was made especially clear when you said “User personas are seen as a common design process component in the human computer interaction industry, but there are some criticisms regarding algorithmic persona creation with data-driven personas and designer bias.” It showed me that both lenses are being given accurate representation, and no opinion is being expressed.
Great job overall! - Eric Andrews/ejandre
