User:Jshahi10/sandbox

Article Evaluation: This article I have decided to contribute seems to be neutral. There are many things that are relevant to the argument and that help the reader have a better understanding of this topic. At the beginning of the article, it mainly focuses on why many states wanted this program removed. It also talks about how long and how it took several tries to get DACA established. I feel the viewpoint on removing DACA is talked about most in the article over the other side. I went over a few of the citations and the links do seem to work so they used reliable sources. On the talk page, there are not many comments on it. There is one comment discussing the circumstances for a minor arriving after DACA dates. There is also another comment that seems to be doing exactly what I am doing, which is commenting on a controversial topic. There is not really any conversation going on about this page. The suggested edit is on the talk page shows the changes that person would make to this page; it also shows where and why they would change something so that it does not seem like they are just opposing the writers views. One of the comments they make I agree with. The writer repeats statistics, that to me, are not really necessary they are just trying to persuade the reader with the facts. Most sources used support what the author stated in the article. For example, there is one source that talks on how people believe that the DACA members are stealing the jobs of the U.S citizens, but they are actually helping the economy. The article used helps to justify their reasoning as to why DACA members are actually helping the economy not hurting it. There is not really anything out of date; although they talk about things in the past, it is about things like when DACA was established. That being said, the writer does very well as to refer to the background of the DACA program and to give knowledge to the reader about this topic. The writer citing and stating all this information about DACA also shows credibility of the author because they are proving they use reliable sources and do not just pull things out of their butt. It says that this article is part of the "Wikipedia Commons" project. This shows books over the dreamers, politicians, and images of those who are advocating for DACA. Here this topic is more neutral but in class and really anywhere it is much more biased. I feel it is more biased in class because people just want others to hear what they have to say, but no one wants to hear what anyone else has to say. In this article, it is more neutral so that everyone will read it and not only one side. If the writer was more towards one side, I feel like not everyone would read it because they only want to hear more about what they believe in. I think adding a personal point of view would show the pro DACA side. That may feel biased but I think it would give a different perspective on the situation rather than just people who know about the subject discussing it.