Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 17 August 2021 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Social Work, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Social Work on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Social WorkWikipedia:WikiProject Social WorkTemplate:WikiProject Social WorkSocial work articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Hi there, I am a University of Sydney student who is updating this page. I have recently updated the page with my first 1000 words. I was hoping any contributors could provide me some feedback on how I can further elevate this stub. Thanks so much! LMJ050100 (talk) 05:28, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, LMJ050100! Welcome to Wikipedia. I have read the article and found it to be very informative and well-written – I've got a few quick notes, some of which were taken from Wikipedia's Manual of Style (MOS).
I see that you have used the visual editor to contribute – this has left some minor artifacts such as including periods in preceding links: for example, the following would be an example of what I found (note the unlinking of the full stop/period in the second line. While it is subtle, it saves space and improves overall wikitext legibility).
Try not to use:
... the [[foo bar|foo bar.]] But ...
→ ... the foo bar. But ...
Instead, use:
... the [[foo bar]]. But ...
→ ... the foo bar. But ...
The same thing would go for including quotes in the links: simply write them outside the wikilink. Note that the initial letter of these links are case-insensitive – [[Foo bar]] and [[foo bar]] link to the same page, but appear differently when rendered.
Per MOS:CURLY, "straight" quotes are used instead of their “curly” counterparts. Personally, I would love if all articles exhibited curly/smart quotes, but for consistency and accessibility reasons, we stick to straight quotes.
Citation templates are your friend. <nowiki> tags are (usually) reserved for avoiding templates or links, but clickable links are needed in citations. Take a look at {{cite journal}} and {{cite web}} to get started – these templates do the hard formatting within <ref> tags for you: for example, writing <ref>{{cite journal |last=Hamilton |first=Karine |date=2010-01-29 |title=The moral economy of violence |journal=Critical Studies |pages=127–143 |doi=10.1080/1}}</ref> generates Hamilton, Karine (29 January 2010). "The moral economy of violence". Critical Studies: 127–143. doi:10.1080/1. Much easier, in my opinion. For a full list of the parameters and how to include them in articles, see the documentation page for the template and Wikipedia:Citing sources for more information.
Inline citations are to be written following punctuation and preceding a space: for example, In 1982, stuff happened.<ref name="Smith"/> In 1983, even more stuff happened.<ref name="Doe"/>.
Check what you're linking to: links are encouraged, but many pages on the project are disambiguation pages, meaning they do not explain the topic in question but instead act as a focal point, with links to similarly-titled pages in different fields and topics.
Note that I am by no means representative of everyone's thoughts on the article – we all have different things that pop out at us. I have performed the changes above on the first half of the article – you're welcome to continue with the remainder. With your new additions, I believe this page is now beyond a stub, I have elevated this to a Start-class article. For more information on improving article quality, take a look at Wikipedia:Writing better articles. Hopefully this proves helpful to you – you're welcome to reply with more questions! TGHL ↗16:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @TheGoodAndHolyLord:! Wow! Thank you so much for all your awesome feedback, that really does help. Across this week, I am set to add another 1000 words so will keep all of your comments in mind before I do. I dove deeper into the neutral point of view Wikipedia page and I have attempted to improve this in the article. Specifically, in the History and Criticisms and controversies section.
In terms of the clickable links section for citations, some of the articles I have found on my university databases/library. For those articles I did a similar search on public forums, ie google scholar, however they do not show up so I am unsure if it would be relevant to provide a link as it would not direct the reader to anything useful? My tutor suggested in these instances, a clickable link would not be needed. What would you suggest to do in this instance?
I think I understand what you saying with the disambiguation pages, but to clarify, go over my links and anything not directly linked to the topic at hand, unlink?
Again, thank you so much for your patience and help! I'll continue to keep in touch as I continue this article, you're a legend!
@LMJ050100: Thank you for the kind words! Your tutor is correct regarding clickable links in offline sources: books and newspapers, when not archived/scanned and uploaded, are two examples in which a URL for them would not exist – linking to the Amazon page for the book in question would not be helpful! In this case, include as much information about the source as needed: the ISBN (books) or ISSN (serials), author name, date, title, publisher, etc. – you'll notice the citation example I provided above could just as easily have omitted the |doi= parameter for the only link (to the DOI) and it would have been accepted. Think of someone reading the article and wanting to learn more from the references – would this reader be able to find the book at their library with the information you provided? Wikipedia policy is that these sources are just as valid as online sources, meaning there is nothing against a whole article based solely on books only found offline.
If you encounter a roadblock on citing a source, I can give advice on citation methods. I checked the links and moved one link over to a more specific page. I am excited to see this article grow further! TGHL ↗ 🍁 04:36, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @TheGoodAndHolyLord:! I hope you are having a good week. I was just wondering if you could do a brief review of my additions to this Wikipedia article. I really found your feedback helpful after my first review, so I would be very appreciative of any further inputs. In addition, I have amended the lead section to include references, therefore I was wondering if you could please review the presence of this hatnote. Thanks in advance! From a very grateful university student LMJ050100 (talk) 07:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, LMJ050100, I apologize for not writing sooner (things got busy for a sec, lol). Looks like the maintenance template template has been removed, however I have made some small tweaks to the article. First, though, in regards to the image you uploaded to Commons, it looks like it is missing evidence of permission – there is no proof that the author agreed to license the file under the given license. If you haven't already, use this tool to send an email to our volunteers to ensure the copyright is valid. (I took the liberty of cropping the image to remove the black borders.) In regards to the article, I adjusted the lead sentence to match MOS:BOLDSYN, which states that only the first occurrence of the title and significant alternative titles are placed in bold. The caption of the thumbnail image of the Red Crescent appears... rather tall, so some of it was moved into the article body. I'm not quite sure on the idea of a navbox at the bottom of the article, I trimmed it down to avoid just a plain list of regions and causes that would be better placed in the infobox at the top, however other editors may remove it completely. I converted a numbered list to prose to better fill out the section. Apart from a few minor copyedits (hyphens in ages are used for compound adjectives, such as "the 17-year-old is..." vs. "At 17 years old, the person is..."), all looks good! The new images really help to spice up the article and give readers who are just scanning through the article a fair amount of visual hints: Red Crescent, a map, Nelson Mandela, etc. It seems that someone has already gone through (with the help of a robot) and cleaned up extra spaced between <ref> tags and wikilinks. The does article looks really good, though, a massive improvement from before you took it on – kudos! I see that a peer review request is open, that should provide a second opinion on this to really up the article to the next level. TGHL ↗ 🍁 15:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all! I am thinking of adding another section 'Goals and objectives' of the organisation. I am thinking of putting this section after the History section. Would love to get some opinions on whether or not this would be a good space for this section. Thanks!
LMJ050100 (talk) 04:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An impartial editor has reviewed the proposed edit(s) and asked the editor with a conflict of interest to go ahead and make the suggested changes.
Specific text to be added or removed: The hatnote present for the lead section - This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Australian People for Health, Education and Development Abroad" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (March 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Reason for the change: I have recently amended the lead section to include references at each point.
Thank you @Extua: Your validation is much appreciated. If you are able to and see this as relevant, would you please be able to remove the hatnote on this page for me? Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LMJ050100 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=logo}
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
