User:Brusso7/sandbox

= Article Evaluation = Link to my evaluation Work

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Brusso7/Evaluate_an_Article&oldid=915042672

Link to Talk page where contribution is

Talk:Social movement

Link to all 4 possible choices/evaluations
User:Brusso7/Choose an Article

The two articles I am thinking of working on the most are Politics and technology and Social movement. Both of my evaluations are down below for reference but are also on the link provided above. I feel as if these subjects provide the most sources and can reach the next level with an additional section or two.

1.Politics and technology

 * Politics and technology

Article Evaluation


 * Extremely brief just talking about basics. Only criticizes and talks about the problems with technology in politics. I could add more benefits of technology as well as a few more downfalls. I definitely feel as if I can add a full section dedicated to providing the benefits of technology

2.Social movement

 * Social movement

Article Evaluation

This article is probably the biggest one but definitely has room for improvement. I choose this one to make my talk page contribution as well because I strongly feel I can elevate this article to the next level. It briefly talks about how social media has improved how social movements work but I think their is more to say about technology. One section I could add, which was recommended in the talk page, is geographic distribution. This is because across the world their are different types of social movements that run in different ways.

LiquidFeedback
I choose this article as it is definitely the most in need of work. Currently it outlines the premise of LiquidFeedback but lacks real detail. I plan to add a section revealing the pros and cons in order to allow the reader to make an educated judgement on the topic. Also I may go into deeper detail on countries currently using such mechanisms.

Description-additional info
Liquid Democracy can be seen as going hand in hand with LiquidFeedback. Liquid Democracy focuses on the idea of voting taking place using technology while LiquidFeedback is a system trying to bring the idea into fruition. The online platform gives the user the power to vote on affairs themselves. Additionally, people are given the option to delegate their vote to a group or select person if they feel as if the individuals or individual is better suited to make the decision. The purpose of this is to allow the most knowledgeable on a specific subject to make the decision. Because not everyone is invested in political issues evenly, the ability to delegate a persons vote to someone more knowledgeable can make the voter feel secure.

LiquidFeedback is not only used to give users the ability to vote rather it allows them to make propositions on certain issues. The proposed initiatives can be tweaked by users, if desire, to the satisfaction of others. LiquidFeeedback was originally designed for people to ponder different subjects but it has evolved from that. The concept of Liquid Democracy has made it so people can fight for what they want using the software of LiquidFeedback. Within LiquidFeedback's "Polling Mode", users have the ability to see whether or not the edits they made to a proposed bill are agreed upon or not by the general community. The platform allows users to interact with each other to shape bills into the best versions they can be. Discussions take place in order to make sure the community agrees with the changes in order to make sure people will vote in favor of the topic.

History-added info
The German Pirate Party designed LiquidFeedback in order to be able to participate in Liquid Democracy. The technology used has provided direction for how the party makes decisions on issues. Feedback from users allows party officials to know what the people want while also allowing for peoples opinions. It can be used to make sure everyone in the party has a vote and that their voice is heard. Some people may not be quite as passionate about an issue than others which is accounted for by the ability to delegate votes. The countries mentioned in the paragraph above all have similiar forms of Liquid Democracy that stem from the software of LiquidFeedback.

Criticism-additional info
By allowing communities to discuss bills in hope for change, political preferences can emerge at times. People may want to keep such information close to them and in turn can become deterred from the idea of voting using LiquidFeedback's software. The ability to give votes to other users comes with a huge problem when it comes to the integrity of the election. If someone were to give their vote to another user not because they think that they are more knowledgeable on a subject but because they received some sort of benefit, the election would lose purity. Due to the uncertainty behind the reasons people actually give their vote to another user, rigging of an election can never be know. Even though votes are transparent, it is difficult to prevent corrupt people from becoming super-voters that hold lots of power. The transparency of the voting also deters certain citizens from wanting to vote. Some citizens want their political decisions to remain private as they fear other people may judge them based on their decision. Normal elections allow citizens to keep their political preferences private where as LiquidFeedback demonstrates transparency when it comes to this in order to make sure users are who they say they are.

Pros of LiquidFeedback
LiquidFeedback is focused on the future of voting. The software is designed to promote civic engagement towards those that may be hesitant to have their voice heard. By allowing people to vote and make decisions electronically, LiquidFeedback provides a convenience factor when it comes to voting. In addition, those that may feel shy about voicing their opinions can speak freely on the platform without having to be worried about what others think of them. The Pirate Party has also been using the system of LiquidFeedback since 2010 and it has been extremely reliable thus far. The reliability stems from the decision making process used within LiquidFeedback. It successfully determines what voters want by using the "Schulze mathematical method", which takes into account how people perceive a situation rather than a simple yes or no. This provides a more accurate depiction of how people see certain situations.

The ability to transfer votes to more knowledgeable users can stand out as a benefit because everyone wants what is best for their community. Parties using LiquidFeedback have demonstrated that vote delegation is a solution to creating a better society. Only LiquidFeedback allows votes to be transferred without the need for an extreme reason. The ability to transfer votes without an excuse needed benefits all by making sure the decision needed by society is not hindered by those that do not know everything about a proposal.

Peer Review Response
I am thankful Adamng926 took his time to review my article. I definitely agree that I should develop the lead of my article as it does not incorporate my new section on the positives of LiquidFeedback. Additionally I should add to the original Lead as it seems to be missing a few sections that currently are in the article. Regarding the grammatical issues, I will have to obviously fix those before submitting my article. I see the possibility of my sources being a bit outdated and will work to find more modern articles. While looking originally I struggled to do so and that is why most my sources are a few years old.I am glad my article was found to be neutral because that is important in a Wikipedia article. Overall I definitely should look for a more relevant article to take my piece to the next level.