User:Farouk Najjar/sandbox

Article Evaluation
The article I have chosen to write about is called "Change.org", which goes through the history of the organization, some of the notable petitions which have occurred in different parts of the world, as well as some of the criticisms of their system.

Lead:

The lead section was pretty good in the sense that it was concise and allowed me to quickly understand what Change.org means, as well as only using information which is present in. the article. Although this was the case, I didn't feel as though it highlighted or gave a brief overview of the sections coming further down in the Wikipedia article, such as the criticisms of the organization.

Content:

Content-wise, the article definitely contained content that was relevant to change.org. Additionally, I felt like each section was given an equal amount of space, with one idea not overshadowing any of the others.

Tone:

The article remained with what I thought was a neutral tone throughout, as most of the sections were being narrated and sourced from interviews or reports and everything was cited. Most of the article was presented as a recollection of events such as the "notable petitions" section as well as the "criticisms" section.

Sources and references:

The information in the Wikipedia article is sourced, and all of the claims or statements made have an attached link to it, so I could always go back to the sources and see where the information is coming from. One criticism I have is that some of the links, such as the ones for the Alabama petition on Family Guy, had reference links to media articles, which could definitely have had a biased approach, with the chance of it leaking into the current article.

Organization and Writing Quality:

Article didn't have any spelling mistakes that I could find, and was organized into not too long sections which were highlighted in the table of contents. Organization for me was one of the big strengths with the article.

Images:

The article did not contain any images other than a picture of the logo of the organization, so an enhancement on understanding could have been missed out there. Additionally, the visual appeal of the article could have been improved with a couple of images of some of the petitions, or the people who started them.

Talk page discussion:

The talk page remained quite civil. There were some instances of vandalism, and after reading a bit further I saw some things I didn't pick up on, such as the emphasis on the word "organization" which could have alluded to the business being a non-profit, or possibly just making the information of the business being for-profit harder to find. Additionally, some bias could be present as some of the contributors were payed by Change.org.

Overall impressions:

The article, in my opinion, seems pretty strong. Although I felt there could have been some more sections implemented in addition to the 3 major ones included, I felt the information included was accurate and well sourced. The strength of the article to me was in the organization, as it made the whole thing easy to read. If I had to make any comments, I would just ask for more pictures to be displayed throughout the article.

Attached here is the talk page in which I have posted a comment, signed by my name. (Farouk Najjar)

Talk:Change.org

3 Potential Topics
Elections in Lebanon Wikipedia article

- Article needs to be updated with hyperlinks

- Article needs new information for municipal elections section.

Creating my own article on Mindlab

- Mindlab was a civic technology implemented in Denmark which I found on the civic technologies tab, but had not found a wikipedia article on it. I found a decent amount of google searches on the topic and could consider doing my project on something like that.

Cal Grant

- Wikipedia article discussing the financial aid program for cal students.

- Very short article

- Has a "Please improve this" tab at the top.

List of topics I can tackle
Out of the 3 chosen, I think my weakest topic would be the. one about the Lebanese elections, as information regarding that topic would be difficult to find. Mindlab would be a great source as nothing about it exists on Wikipedia yet, and there are a lot of good news and primary sources regarding the topic. Additionally, the Cal Grant. one looks very specific to what we are doing in the class, and is quite short and without many sources, meaning that there is potentially a lot of. value I can add to the source.

ClearGov
The topic I have decided to write about is a civic technology startup called ClearGov, which enhances the ability for local governments to both create budgets and communicate them to local populations. I will be creating this article as it does not already exist. I feel like I could add sections such as history of the startup, possible funding, a brief section on the founders, as well as potential cases of local governments which have implemented ClearGov into some of their systems.

Possible Bibliography Brainstorm
https://www.builtinboston.com/2022/01/11/cleargov-raises-20m-hiring-govtech

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220208005114/en/ClearGov-Repeats-Triple-Digit-Growth-in-2021

https://www.govtech.com/biz/cleargov-jumps-into-government-budgeting-software-bringing-ai-with-it.html

https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2018/06/06/maynard-startup-cleargov-raises-2m-to-make-sense.html

https://bostonstartupsguide.com/community-news/government-data-startup-cleargov-gets-boost-new-funding/

https://techweek.com/cleargov-transparency-government/

Response to Peer Review (zeinaxd)
Dear Zeinaxd,

I appreciate the comments you have made in order for me to create a strong article on ClearGov. The table of contents I provided is rather brief, and I do agree that a section on what ClearGov is first and foremost would be best to allow users to understand the rest of the article. I also agree that since this is a civic technology class, my article can be more focused on the civic technological elements of ClearGov and how it benefits the connection between governments and populations in contrast to only discussing the financial aspects of its funding, acquisition history, etc.

Thank you for the feedback, I hope to integrate it fully as I continue to work on my article!

ClearGov
ClearGov is a civic technology startup company created in 2015 by co-founders Chris Bullock and Bryan Burdick, Burdick states that "goal at ClearGov has been to help local governments budget better and to alleviate much of the cumbersome, manual processes that come with creating their annual budget documents". The for-profit company caters towards budgeting by enhancing the ability for local governments to both create budgets and communicate them effectively to local populations. The company is able to operate using their cloud based software through the use of their subsidiary company ClearForms, previously named CityGrows, before its acquisition by ClearGov in 2022.

Since its founding in 2021, the company has seen large growth in the industry. ClearGov has raised over $20 million in growth stage capital from a software supporting growth equity firm. Additionally, Burdick has stated how over "500 governments are now using Digital Budget Book is proof that we are well on our way of achieving that goal".

The Massachusetts's based company provides various services to governments in order to help them more efficiently handle their processes and then communicate them to the masses. An array of products are available to users tackling a variety of different purposes, such as the Digital Budget Book, Personnel Budgeting, Operational Budgeting, etc. One such service, the capital budgeting product released in 2021 was implemented to discontinue the use of inefficient paper based processes and replace them with collaborative technological ones.

Table of Contents (will add in later)

History of Founders

- Cleargov relation to civic tech

Services Provided:

-Capital Budgeting

-Personnel Budgeting

-Operational Budgeting

-Digital Budget Book

-Transparency

-Other benefits

Funding

Current Status

(still not finished as I haven't thought of all the sections yet).