Wikipedia:Peer review/Welfare's effect on poverty/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's a worthwhile subject
Thanks, CartoonDiablo (talk) 15:23, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- The first thing I see is a big fat banner saying the article has multiple issues. The guidelines for peer review say articles should not have major cleanup banners. Noloop (talk) 01:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Agree with the above comment. Thanks for your work on this, but it is so short that it would not qualify for WPDYK (only 957 B, so much less than the 1500 B minimum prose size needed for DYK, not counting tables or refs or captions), so there is not a lot to say about it. Here are some suggestions for improvement.
- The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
- More info is needed in some of the refs - Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
- This needs to be expanded a lot. Basic terms need to be explained briefly, as do the methods of the studies cited. How is poverty defined? WHen are the pre and post statistics from (as most countires have had welfare of some sort for a long time). How are the absolute and relative poverty rates defined and measured and what makes them different?
- I am sure that there are many more studies on this topic than the few cited here. One of them is presented only in the caption of a graph (child poverty and taxes).
- While the pro-welfare statistics are reflective of the developed world, the anti-welfare views are only from the USA. This could be seen as a WP:WEIGHT and WP:NPOV issue.
- What about the rest of the world?
- I am not sure the WP:Fair use grap image meets WP:NFCC
- The article is almost all short (one or two sentence) paragraphs - to improve the flow, these should be combined with others or perhaps expanded
- A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are quite a few WP:FAs at Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Politics_and_government that may be good models. Anarcho-capitalism may be a good model, though it is older and not as completely cited as is current practice.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)