User talk:Cheikhgaye1997

Welcome!

Hello, Cheikhgaye1997, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Notes

Here are my notes on your sandbox draft. Again, keep in mind that since the article topic is more closely debated and watched on Wikipedia, you should leave a note on the articles' talk pages just to give a general head's up of what you want to add. Anywho, here are the notes:

• This section should be about how the UNRWA applies specifically to Palestinians in Jordan. The section as it stands looks to be solely about the organization and doesn't really mention the article topic (Palestinians in Jordan) except in brief passing to mention that it is aimed at helping Palestinians in various different countries, one of which is Jordan. This should more specifically look at the organization's efforts in Jordan as opposed to a more general overview.

You may want to re-tool this section to be about relief organizations in general that assist Palestinians in Jordan, as it may be difficult to find a lot of information about this.

• Something else to keep in mind is that this section is written to be very favorable towards UNRWA and as such, comes across as non-neutral. While this wasn't your intent, it may also come across as slanted towards presenting UNRWA in as favorable a light as possible. A look at the organization's main article shows that it's received a fairly large amount of criticism and controversy. For example, some argue that it fosters dependency and others have stated that people involved with the organization have used its social media account to incite violence against Iraeli Jews. Most recently this happened. The organization has claimed that it was hacked, however not all critics believe this.

My point in citing all of this is that the section should be as non-neutral as possible and if it does focus on one organization in specific, it should cover the criticisms as well as any praise UNRWA has received.

• The sources are almost entirely primary. You can use primary sources like the UNRWA website to back up basic information but in situations like this it's really not a good idea to make it the main place that you get information, given the controversies surrounding the organization. Primary sources will almost always present themselves in as favorable a light as possible, so they're not going to be neutral sources for themselves. With some topics this may not be as major an issue but in this situation you're writing about an organization that has received criticism over its activities, meaning that if it does discuss this criticism, it's pretty much guaranteed that it's either going to downplay the criticism or outright state that it's invalid. I'm not sure if the journal article is written by a UNRWA employee or if it takes a favorable viewpoint of the organization, but keep in mind that the author is reliant on testimony from UNRWA employees, who will more than likely present their employer in a favorable light. Given that it's listed on the organization's website, I'm going to assume that it's most likely taking a more favorable outlook towards UNRWA.

The reasons why I'm emphasizing this is that using only or predominantly primary sources (or sourcing presenting UNRWA in a favorable light) won't show a good depth of coverage or insight, which in turn can make the work appear biased or non-neutral, even if this wasn't your intent. This is something to be extremely careful about when you're writing about a controversial topic.

I hope that this information helps! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:57, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

• I almost forgot to address the topic of Palestinian refugee camps. If you do want to focus specifically on UNRWA, I would recommend that you focus on the topic of the refugee camps since you can be more general in this article - it's fine to be general since the article looks at the refugee camps in general. However that said, also keep in mind that the section should give a general overview of UNRWA, both the favorable and the controversies surrounding its work with these camps. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:00, 31 December 2018 (UTC)