Talk:National Partnership for Reinventing Government

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): Aam156, B j36, Austintxguy02, Ljcarrillo7, SpencerCard. Peer reviewers: Ese.agho, Alexandralopez324, Tstamp2, Mackenziediaz11, Commmajor20.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review Form
The introduction explains what the National Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR) is and why it was created.

The key points of the article are to explain what the NPR was for, its impact, as well as explain other commissions created before the NPR was created under the Clinton administration.

The contributions to this article help create a stronger understanding on how this reform helped shape public administration under the Clinton administration. Their addition of other commission that had happened before helps the reader understand that this type of reform has happened before. The addition of housing and urban development within the impact also makes the scope of this reform larger. It also creates a deeper understanding of the scope of the reform itself.

Yes, the article does have a clear focus on the NPR and how it affected public administration.

Yes, the article has a long list of sources that are used correctly to support the material.

Yes, the article pulls from a multitude of sources from libraries, newspapers, reviews, and journals to help explains NPR and its impact on the public sphere.

Yes, the article explains multiple side of public administration that was effected by NPR and how those reforms created changes within that system.

Yes, the sources are clearly labeled and placed in the reference section.

The article has a good list of sources that capture the topic well. The sources, because of the time frame that this topic was created and used, are somewhat dated. However, I can understand why because of when this reform was put into place.

The resources used are used to explain the topic and are used correctly. They provide evidence that the information was not made up and can be found with one click.

No, the article holds a neutral status on what information it provides with appropriate sources to explain where the information was found. Yes, the article reflects a removed opinion about the reform and how it affected each part of public administration. However, the article does accurately explain the feelings of those in charge of the reform and how it was received. The entire article is well written. It correctly uses sources to explain concepts and establish an understand of the time that this reform was being used. The article can be read without much fear of misunderstanding. This article can also be used to explain NPR to a wide array of individuals that might need this article. The sentences are simple and easy to read and the only time large language is used is when it is completely necessary. The only note I would make about the whole format of the article would be to move Other Similar Commissions to the bottom of the article below the impact of NPR. By placing it at the beginning of the article after the introductory paragraph kind of throws the reader off what the article just explained. The rest of the article is structured in a way that makes sense to the reader and to explaining the reform. I enjoy the addition of the different forms of public administration that was changed due to this reform. I feel that this edit adds a stronger understanding to the article itself I would move the Other Similar Commissions section down below the impact as well as re word the introduction to make the flow of the paragraph go better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Commmajor20 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review 2
The introduction clearly explains what the NPR is, despite me going in thinking NPR was only a radio station, and when it was created. The key points being the history, similar commissions, background and impact the NPR has in relation to other government entities. The contributions help to explain the importance and impact the NPR had, along with why it was even implemented. By sharing the history/previous commissions I better understand the need for the NPR during the Clinton Administration. The article has a very clear focus, the NPR, and shows directly why it is important to Public Administration. The article also explains how many aspects of the government, and in turn Public Administration, are impacted by the NPR, with direct sections for such impacts. The sources provided do a great job of supporting the information given, and the links do work, from a variety of different mediums. Due when the NPR was created the sources are from the past, but that is to be expected. They are also very clearly labeled within the article as citations and at the end in the reference section. The article is neutral on the actual results of the NPR, simply stating facts of the impact and the reasoning by those who created the NPR. The article is punctual and grammatically correct throughout, though the organization seems a bit off. I would make "History" the first section and move "Other Similar Commissions" down in order to make the article look a little cleaner. Also the bolding within the "Impact" section of each headline is a bit distracting, and could probably be better served with more subtlety. Overall the additions are clear and make the article stronger, while also not serving any self-serving agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tstamp2 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 5 December 2016 (UTC)