User talk:Jtupe/sandbox
1. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic?
-Yes. There is one instance at the end of the Land Administration section where it's mentioned that registering property in the Philippines takes nine steps. I'm sure that this is relevant, but it isn't illustrated how.
2. Is there anything that distracted you? Is the article neutral?
-Nothing distracted me, and this is a neutral article
3. Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
-There was one reference to Ferdinand Marcos "wasting" public funds, and I felt the word "waste" had too many biased connotations
4. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
-There was a lot of mention on how businesses viewed and have been affected by corruption but no mention of how Filipino citizens are affected.
5. Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference?
-This links work in most cases. However some citations use parentheses rather than the Wikipedia method. However, all claims are cited by reliable references
6. Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Is any information out of date?
-There is a lot of information from organizations like the World Bank and Transparency International as well as the US State Department's Office of Investment Affairs and the Philippine Journal of Public Administration. None of these sources seem biased and I found the information to be presented fairly -As far as out of date information, the legislation section references a 1999 World Bank report to illustrate improvements in fighting corruption where I think it would be more appropriate to use a recent report
7. Is anything missing that should be added?
-Nothing that I can think of at the moment
General Comments -Great article and very informative. I was shocked to see how barren the current Wikipedia page is, so it's good that you're doing something about it! Below are my suggestions for each section. It may look like a lot and seem pretty critical, but don't take it to heart. I'm just a very critical person, so I'm prone to pointing out a lot of things in a project like this. All the suggestions, however, are relatively minor issues. There were also some formatting errors in the draft which I smoothed out. Overall, this is clearly really well researched and full o very necessary additions to the current page.
Comments on Intro -In the paragraph beginning with "The US State Department's..." I would shorten the quote and put it into your own words -"Most estimates of losses due to corruption are imprecise and not very rigorous": Needs a citation -"Lastly, corruption is a significant problem in the Philippines for the following reasons": Don't use a "lastly," since in Wikipedia there's no need for conclusions
Comments on Historical Background -Great paragraph! Really incorporates all viewpoints -"Graft and corruption have been historically traced to colonization, specifically during the colonization of the Philippines from the Spanish during 1521 to 1898": May be redundant and unnecessary -I would suggest a sentence like this: Jose N. Endriga (1979) argues that the Philippine’s historical upbringing in colonization has led to its corruption today. Among the examples given, Endriga states that, under Spanish rule from 1521 to 1898, civil servants received inadequate payment which provided incentives for civil servants to engage in corruption to augment their income." -"However, it is important to note that the existence of corruption cannot be attributed to the Spanish conquest alone, as research has shown that pre-colonial Filipino culture may have experienced elements of corruption as well": Such as..? -I moved "This stance is supported by Quah..." to a part of the paragraph where I felt it was a better fit -"The historical context of corruption in the Philippines is necessary to understand in order to see how history is reflected in the Philippines' contemporary politics": Unnecessary. This is more of a sentence for an essay, not an encyclopedia
Comments on Scandals -Use subheadings in the Scandal part -Using the word "wasted" makes the authors opinion too clear -"projects along Manila Bay": Unclear; What kind of projects? -"perhaps not even his widow': A bit awkward -"scholars have typified corruption in the public sphere to the regime of Ferdinand Marcos": Unclear what this means -"due to government involvement in the private sphere, specifically Marcos and his inner circle's involvement in crony capitalism": Unnecessary, since this is redundant and is also implied within the subject matter. I changed it to place crony capitalism and private sphere involvement at the beginning of the sentence
Comments on Judicial System -Could be expanded upon, although I suspect that's your intent anyway -"Companies do not have sufficient faith in the independence of the judiciary and they rate the efficiency of the legal framework in settling disputes and challenging regulations as poor": Need a bit more on how this information was procured. Is this from a study?
Comments on Police -For the information on companies views of the police there should be a mention of how these opinions were gathered: "X study showed that..." -The transition into Duterte's accusation is a bit awkward
Comments on Land Administration -Lots of good examples. They just need to be tied together -"Registering property takes nine procedures in the Philippines, which is double the regional average": Doesn't necessarily suggest corruption. DO people use corruption to get around the procedures? Also which region is this?
Comments on Natural Resources -"Poor value realization and revenue management have caused the Philippines overall resource governance to be judged as 'weak'": Judged as weak by whom? -Great examples and a good flow of information
Comments on Legislation -Should this section maybe be renamed "Efforts to combat corruption" or something? -Is it possible to used a more recent report than 1999? Also this is a World Bank report on what exactly? -"Though encouraging, the Philippines lasting low ranking also says there is a long way to go": This is more of an essay sentence in that it has an opinionated/conclusive aspect to it. I would say something more like, "Despite these improvements, the Philippines still maintains a low ranking..." -Bit of an awkward transition from the 1st paragraph into the bit on efforts at reform -"with more information available on their website": Maybe take out? Providing a non-Wikipedia link to this and nothing else could seem biased
Peer Review by Tom:
[edit]Voice/neutrality
You do a really good job speaking in class. It's evident that you've written your share of papers as you often take a stance and back it up with examples from the readings. For this assignment, I think that's something you should be aware of. There are certain places in the article when I hear your voice coming through, where maybe you could avoid it. Such as:
1. "Corruption is a endemic problem in the Philippines."
Suggestion: Corruption is endemic in the Phillippines. Ok I admit this is nittygritty... In the class so far, haven't we been forced to wonder whether corruption is even a bad thing after all? Most of us would say yes and the answer probably is yes, but it's a tone thing. As the first sentence of the introduction, it immediately takes a voice which says: "corruption is bad, and it's hurting the Phillippines."
2. "Though encouraging, the Philippines lasting low ranking also says there is a long way to go."
This sentence carries an opinion.
3. "Lastly, corruption is a significant problem in the Philippines for the following reasons A World Bank report conducted in 1999 found that the level of corruption (interpreted via business surveys, the media and anti corruption agencies) in the Philippines to:"
This sentence also carries an opinion. Maybe drop what's written in bold?
Flow
1. "Most estimates of losses due to corruption are imprecise and not very rigorous."
Suggestion: Most estimates of losses due to corruption lack precision and rigor.
2. "Most estimates of losses due to corruption are imprecise and not very rigorous. Estimates by the Ombudsman, the Commission on Audit, and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism suggest, however, that very large amounts of public funds are being lost to both political and bureaucratic corruption."
Suggestion: Estimates by the Ombudsman, the Commission on Audit, and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism suggest that the amount of public funds lost to political and bureaucratic corruption is very high. However, most estimates of losses due to corruption lack precision and rigor.
3. "A World Bank report conducted in 1999 found that the level of corruption in the Philippines to..."
suggestion: A World Bank report conducted in 1999 found the level of corruption in the Philippines to...
4. "A 1988 congressional study concluded that because of their 'personalistic world view,' Filipinos were 'uncomfortable with bureaucracy', with rules and regulations, and with standard procedures, all of which tend to be impersonal."
Suggestion:...Filipinos were 'uncomfortable' with bureaucracy, rules and regulations, and standard procedures, all of which tend to be impersonal.
5. "Two problems, in particular, have plagued the civil service: corruption (especially in the Bureau of Customs and the Bureau of Internal Revenue) and the natural tendency of cabinet secretaries to run their departments as independent fiefdoms in the absence of a forceful chief executive."
This sentence could use revision.
6. Consistency in naming your headings. Suggestion: change "corruption in the judicial system" to "judicial system". If you don't say "corruption in the police" you shouldn't say "corruption in the judicial system".
small typos (in CAPS)
This legacy OF HAS led the Philippines to suffer from widespread corruption even today
Furthermore, crony capitalism and heavy private SPERE involvement during the Marcos regime ....
Companies report that they cannot rely on the police services, (GCR 2017-2018) AND, AND businesses rate the National Police's commitment to fighting corruption as 'poor' (SWS 2016).
Furthermore, the court system is slow to resolve land disputes (ICS 2017) and land records are NOT often MISMANAGED due to a lack of trained personnel and funds (ICS 2017). [31]
conclusion: Nice work on this article, you've done an impressive amount of research already. Just do your best to maintain a neutral voice. There are many places where you could link to other wikipedia pages. I'm not surprised you haven't done much of this yet as it's just a draft. But in your final article you could link topics like graft, embezzlement, nepotism, patronage, the various presidents, etc... Hope this has been helpful. -Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom.wiki497 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Manuel Balan Review
[edit]Very good work on this draft, it shows a lot of work and effort, and quite a bit of research. As mentioned in comments above, I think you need to be careful with tone and try to keep the analysis as balanced and objective as possible. Other than that, and some cleaning here and there (some sections could also be expanded a bit), this is in very good shape. If you kepe on going on research, I would go more in depth on some sections, so that you try to avoid stretching yourself too thin. Still, very good work so far, keep it up! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manuelbalan (talk • contribs) 17:58, 27 March 2018 (UTC)