Talk:The Black Star Project

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Michaelcera1, Cnwaokocha, Amelendez97, Ccrane5, Kmatia2, Circlechen002. Peer reviewers: Standingdreamer, Whoisbren, Drax Gon Give It To Ya, Colin.kane, Bford23, Julian Hartsfield.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:08, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review

To begin, I think that the article is very well cited. There are citations throughout the article at various sentences that add to the credibility of the article. The only recommendation is for you to make sure to avoid using sources that require a paywall. Some of the sources cannot be accessed by people who do not have access to the databases that we can use at UIC. The lead also does a good job of summarizing what the organization does and prefaces the rest of the article. Something that I would take a look at would be the relevance of the content that is in the article. The content that is stated feels out of place. Perhaps the content under Phillip Jackson could be moved to the “Mission” section? There is also a lot of information that gets repeated in several sections in the article. Overall, I would take a look at the content and see if some of it could be moved to other sections to help improve the flow of the article. At the start, it mentioned how it was there for African Americans and Latinos but the article only mentions how it seeks to improve African Americans. I would also make the programs section much more important and the biggest focus of the article since it is the most important thing that nonprofit is known for. When writing the article, avoid using words like “passionate” because it can make it seem less neutral. The section on Phillip Jackson is not very neutral and contains material that promotes him rather than the Black Star Project. I don’t think mentioning running for congress is necessary nor is talking about other goals that he has. Once you introduce him as the executive director, you don’t have to mention it each time he is mentioned. It makes it seem like he is the focus of the article and not the nonprofit. This will help making the writing clearer and concise. I would recommend looking over the entire article and trying to see which sentences sound like an advertisement in order to eliminate bias in the article. Drax Gon Give It To Ya (talk) 00:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

More review

I think that there is a ton of great info here, but it could be a lot more effective if structured differently. To start, I think you could use an infobox so that someone can quickly figure out information. Plus, I think it just makes the page look a whole lot more official. Next, I think the 'Phillip Jackson' section can be merged with a larger section covering the groups history. As it is, I don't know a ton about the group's history or other members, and that would be good to know. Clearly Jackson is a pretty important figure within the group, but it feels a little strange for him to have his own header. Additionally, I think the 'Programs' section could use sub-headers to talk about the different programs that BlackStar does. It would just feel a bit more organized. It could be cool if you mentioned notable graduates of the program or notable people involved. I know Lupe Fiasco spoke at a couple events, that could be cool to mention. I don't know if there is sufficient info for this to make sense, but I thought I would suggest it. I agree with the suggestions above about the neutrality issues. I would just go through and try to cut any words that imply intent or morality. Bford23 (talk) 02:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Another review

For the most part, I think the article is pretty good, however, there are things that could be improved. The lead could use some restructuring, I think go into what TBSP is directly and then continue that sentence by explaining its founder and any other origin information. The mission section is good, and straight to the point. I think part of it sounds like something a PR firm would say, but that can always be improved and will get better after multiple revisions. Also, be sure to make sure "The Black Star Project" is consistent within the writing, or that its abbreviated to TBSP. If it's The Black Star Project, and not the Black Star Project, that should be reflected. I agree with Bford23 that Phillip Jackson having his own section is sort of odd, and could be possibly be a subheading under a header that says History, or something of the sort. This one also reads slightly PR-y, so I'd be cautious for that. Instead of saying he's "very passionate" about something, you could say that he had close ties with youth education, and has been a supporter for many years or something that doesn't seem like you work for the guy, haha. The programs section is good, and the citations are strong. All I'd say for this section is that you could possibly add subheaders, just so that it doesn't look like a whole chunk of text - rather broken up. Also maintain consistency in Jackson's name - is it Phillip or Philip? Just things to be mindful about. Otherwise, the article has a strong foundation that will get better with some revisions. Great work! Whoisbren (talk) 04:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

More Peer Review

This article has many good citations which really adds to the strength of the article and makes it much more legitimate. The lead section is really good because it does a good job concisely explaining what the Black Star Project is, however, maybe expand more on all the topics covered in the lead section such as how this program helps latinos in Chicago. I think the sections are well organized when it comes to the information that you guys have presented and it flows well, going in the same order that the lead goes in. This article also does a good job at staying neutral because wen you introduce ideas that could be seen as opinions by wikipedia there are sources to back up the comments which is really good to see. I also liked all the background on the founder of the nonprofit. It gives the reader a clear idea of the problems facing the youth that the article talks about and why something needed to be done about it. It also adds credibility to Jackson because you talk about the way that he has been involved in these issues for quite some time. The programs section also gives the reader a good idea of what the project does to help these at risk youths. One suggestion I have is maybe talk about the places where the project focuses on, such as neighborhoods and schools where the project is implemented. Also maybe tell where some of these programs are located so that anybody reading up on this who might actually use it as a reference for help would know where to go to get involved with the good that the project is doing. Also, since this nonprofit has been around for over 20 years now maybe add information about its successes and failures, if any. Overall, I really think this article is doing well, maybe just add a few more little specifics to some of the information that you have up is my only suggestion. Colin.kane (talk) 02:49, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

More Peer Review

The lead in this article could be stronger - for example, there is no mention of low-income, and the mission of the TBSP is improving the lives of low-income African Americans and Latinos. I think it will also help by being more specific about where in the Chicagoland is the TBSP focusing on? Maybe a specific neighborhood? The mission statement is a bit redundant since you mentioned early on that this nonprofit helps African Americans and Latinos, and naming the section Mission is a bit misleading since the lead ended with the mission. I suggest maybe changing it to Purpose of TBSP or Background Information? "Phillip Jackson is very passionate about youth education" sounds a bit biased to me; I suggest rewording or rephrasing this to maybe something along the lines of his interest in youth education or his involvement with CPS led him to the Black Star Project. As far as the academic programs, I recommend that you have subheadings that talk more about what each program is all about. I noticed Phillip Jackson is misspelled in the last paragraph under the Programs heading. The references are good, and I like how you have them evenly distributed across the article. However, there are a handful of links that are only accessible to users with access to a database. For example, if I was not a UIC student, I would have to pay to read the page you referenced or cited from. Standingdreamer (talk) 03:59, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

More Peer Review

I feel as though the article brings up some really good topics and key areas to focus on, but they are not fully fleshed out. For example, the area about fathers being involved is an interesting subject for this article but it does not really go anywhere. It simply states a fact found and is not very detailed or explaining of the situation. It gives the feeling that at times the article wanders around its subject without giving much information around it. I like the direction that the article is moving in but I think it needs a little more fleshing out in details of things especially specific locations TBSP has effected and how effective the program has been. The formatting needs to be improved in the "Programs" section. This section should detail each program separately as it's on title, this helps for the readers sake of not having to read the entire article to find out a specific piece of information. Treat each program as its own mini article. Other than this, it seems to be on track. Julian Hartsfield (talk) 06:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review by Katie Krol

"Black Star feels that it is important for African American communities to come together to form unity for their children's education and the opportunities that they have. The ultimate goal for them is to get as many people from the community involved so no one is left behind in this fight for equality" These statements could possibly be written in a more neutral stance.

"This decision in turn will have the ability to help lower income communities in the Chicagoland area." This is a confusing sentence, maybe re-word for clarity.

The programs section looks good, with lots of information.

Overall, great start to the article. I would recommend looking into making some sentences more clear and neutral. Great job! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Circlechen002 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 7 November 2017 (UTC)