User:136.152.143.20/sandbox

Possible Articles to work on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_(paper)#Partial

the article is very generic on Chads and doesnt cover nearly enough about their influence on elections. It touches on the 2000 election, most notorious election with hanging chads, but barely describes anything about it. This article could really use some depth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HealthCare.gov

This page is a great baseline, but considering it's size it needs additional verification to make sure all notes about it are completely true and not assumptions or straight up "alternative facts". This article also glosses over it's launch which is actually very important. In short, when the website started it crashed due to the huge influx of people visiting the website. The problem here is this is a government regulated website and the fact that the government couldn't handle it is a big problem, something not written in depth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidy

I want to focus on broadening and "neutral"-izing a section called perverse subsidies. Obviously since the government cant control everything it uses subsidies to encourage business to do their work for them. Perverse subsidies are one's that are quite maligned and in fact aren't helpful to the general public. I hope to first expand the list from 3 to something like 7-10, I already know a bunch off the top of my head. I also want to implement neutrality because the perverse section seems to have quite a bias against big businesses.

Article Evaluation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service

Everything in this article is relevant to the USPS. My only complaint that since there is so much to talk about regarding the USPS it should probably be broken up into seperate articles, but that's just a personal opinion. The article covers everything one would need to know and a little bit more. There are certain sections that are covered a bit too much such as service processing, but if one is to read deep into the USPS than they most likely arent reading it for fun and in fact might want to know everything there is to know. The citations are fully operational in fact so much so it uses web archives to cite deleted websites. These sources are of course unbiased as it is hard to get political when talking about delivering mail. The USPS is only a c-level (low importance) WikiProject. It could use a touch up with the current political climate in how the USPS is responsible for delivering mail-in ballots

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_Postal_Service#Updated_during_the_election_cycle