Talk:Representative bureaucracy

ARMiller017 (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)== Article Evaluation by Ashton Miller ==

Untitled
For this article I would personally like to see more practical applications for how in America we use representative bureaucrats for our elected positions in government. At the city level, state, and federal government. Other counties should be included eventually, and what representative bureaucracy looks like in those countries. I think that more work should go into Samuel Kristov's book to add additional support to this page. Each level of Rep. Bureaucracy should be added to this article from the street level all the way up to levels of economic developer's and city managers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ARMiller017 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

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): Lescast, Ale46txst, Randzeo, Tbcl16, Slateef94. Peer reviewers: Sepsy1056, Jam3jr, Mmd1993.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposed Edits
As a group, we have analyzed and reviewed the Wikipedia article on Representative Bureaucracy. We have come to an agreement, that the current article is lacking substantial information and fails to sufficiently inform Wikipedia users about Representative Bureaucracy. Each of the four present sections can be significantly expanded and a lot of information regarding representative bureaucracy is missing. The first and second section has some relevant information regarding representative bureaucracy. We will be combining and expanding the two into a History section. The Active and Passive Bureaucratic Representation sections should be expanded. The section on Representative Bureaucracy by Samuel Krislov proceeds to give almost no information regarding the book, so it can be added to the History section if seen as relevant. There are very few external links to other Wikipedia pages. While nine sources are listed in the reference section, only four are truly being used. The current references listed appear to be notable resources, however it seems they are not being properly utilized. The existing page lacks adequate information about a topic as vast as representative bureaucracy and fails to utilize a decent number of references. The article is inadequate and will require a page restructuring in order to deliver an efficient and organized layout that is user friendly. Also, the content present on the page needs to be modified and placed within the appropriate subsection. As a group, we will have to collectively restructure and deliver a resourceful page that adheres to Wikipedia guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lescast (talk • contribs) 02:35, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

The lead article is a standard definition from one scientist. The lead article needs to have more information to perhaps make it more interesting. The article illustrates key points on the differences between state, local and federal representative bureaucracy and includes must survey/statistical information that is relevant, but consistent survey information can be monotonous and uninteresting due to different factors. The article focuses on a multitude of topics and the relationship between them and representative bureaucracy, such as the passive and active sides of representative bureaucracy along with the positive and negative effects the subject has on society. There is clear scholarly supported evidence when needed. The contribution does provide a variety of perspectives from an array of political scientists. The positive and negative aspects on society does an excellent job of providing competing points of view. There are many references, but some need to be formatted correctly before being submitted. The language is well formatted and does contain value statements which are referenced. The article does feel as though it has a neutral point of view as it states facts and offers different points of view. Each section is articulated well. The History section could use a little more meat to balance out the page and give context. Sentence structure can be proofed and reworked. No grammatical errors, but some words need to be checked for a hyperlink. Bullet points need to be reworked as well. The language is not entirely complex and is easy to follow. Some sentences do express the same ideas and these should be edited. No images are associated with the page. I like the distinctions that were made between subjects and sub-sections that offer opposing views. It is important to offer a balanced approach when adding contributions to Wikipedia. Two improvements would be on reworking sentence structure and eliminating sentences that repeat themselves in one way or another. --00:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)24.227.213.114 (talk)

Wiki Education assignment: International and Comparative Public Management
— Assignment last updated by PeaceProsperityDemocracy (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)