User talk:Alexis.charles/sandbox

1) There really isn't much information on this topic in the article. So I think that's the biggest issue with this article. Information needs to be added so that the purpose and objectives of this foundation can be understood. There isn't even any comments on the talk page which shows that there hasn't been any work down on this article. 2) Unfortunately there aren't any journal articles on this foundation yet so I have only found credible web pages! Also, I saw that the actual website for the foundation is never referenced which makes it seem like the information on this topic didn't come from the website. There is quite a bit of information from the actual website itself that can be used so I think this would be a good reference too. Live, Love, Laugh Foundation (2015). Deepika Padukone. http://thelivelovelaughfoundation.org/index.html Kler, Nina (2018).Live Love Laugh Foundation Unveils Landmark Report On Public Perception Towards Mental Health In India. BW Businessworld. www.businessworld.in/article/Live-Love-Laugh-Foundation-Unveils-Landmark-Report-On-Public-Perception-Towards-Mental-Health-In-India/23-03-2018-144415/ 3) Does my second website look credible to you? Since it's such a new foundation, there isn't much information on it, but it seems like the information on it is all credible since it is a foundation and not a concept. Also, is it okay to use references that are already used in the article? Because it seems like they only took a little bit of information from their articles but there is a lot more that could be taken from the websites that are listed. Laurengrant19 (talk) 00:52, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

As Lauren said, the page is definitely lacking important information. I think one thing that should be included is why this foundation needed to be started, so focusing on prevalence rates of depression, and anxiety in India and globally would be important to have as support in the background information.

Two resources I have found are:

Grover, S., Dutt, A., & Avasthi, A. (2010). An overview of Indian research in depression. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 52(Suppl1), S178–S188. http://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5545.69231 Venkatesh, B. T., Andrews, T., Mayya, S. S., Singh, M. M., & Parsekar, S. S. (2015). Perception of stigma toward mental illness in South India. Journal of Family Medicine & Primary Care, 4(3), 449–453. https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.ndsu.nodak.edu/10.4103/2249-4863.161352 Questions/Comments :

Should we include background information on recent global trends to reduce stigma related to mental health since this foundation is apart of that movement? Since the foundation was started due to prevalence rates in India, but the foundation is now in the US should we include information about mental health in the US?Alexis.charles (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

1) The current wikipedia page is obviously very sparse, but the information that is there is also very vague. The description merely says it is an organization that "deals with mental health issues." This is not very specific as to how the organization is doing this. We don't know if they are offering therapy or distributing resources or starting new organizations or only raising awareness. There is no history of anything being added to the article, either.

2) I found two journal articles discussing how social media is changing the face of mental health treatment and how it can be used to our advantage. This could help make our case for why the Live Laugh Love Foundation should be more well-known.

Take Two Aspirin And Tweet Me In The Morning: How Twitter, Facebook, And Other Social Media Are Reshaping Health Care. Carleen Hawn Health Affairs 2009 28:2, 361-368

Moorhead, S. A., Hazlett, D. E., Harrison, L., Carroll, J. K., Irwin, A., & Hoving, C. (2013). A New Dimension of Health Care: Systematic Review of the Uses, Benefits, and Limitations of Social Media for Health Communication. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(4), e85. http://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1933

3) Do you think, given our topic is not very present on wikipedia and isn't named specifically in journal articles, the articles we did find surrounding our topic are sufficient to provide further background on the topic? That way, the rest of our information specifically about the organization itself can be directly from their website. Serenacurran (talk)

1) One problem with the current Live Love Laugh article is that is lacks a lot of information. It is very brief and only describes the bare minimum of the foundation such as who created it and that it is trying to raise awareness on mental health. It does not discuss things like why the organization was created and what it has accomplished so far.

2) Two sources: Behere, P; Kumar, K & Behere, A. (2017). Depression: Why Talk? Indian Journal of Medical Research, 411-413.

Conard, P; Armstrong, M & Young, C. (2017). Unnoticed Heros Caring for Visible and Invisible Wounds of the Nation's Military Heroes. Medsurg Nursing, 365-385.

The first article discusses the founder of the foundation, Deepika Padukone, and how she is trying to spread awareness on depression and anxiety. The second article lists the Live Love Laugh foundation as a resource to help people define their feelings.

3)One question I have for you is if you have any recommendations on where to find credible sources or articles on this foundation. It is a newer idea so I am struggling to find a few good sources with information that will be beneficial to add to the existing Wikipedia article. Also the two sources I have are credible and they work, but they only talk about the Live Love Laugh foundation for a sentence or two, do you think they’re worth keeping? Lcapp (talk) 17:01, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Lauren G
Lauren, I think you did a very good job of covering the main points. You cover why its notable right away and establish context. One thing that could be changed is making the second paragraph more concise.Alexis.charles (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Serena
Serena, your lead section is very interesting and concise. I think it would be beneficial to add more information on why this foundation is different from others to establish notability.

Lauren C
Lauren, I think you did a good job overall with your lead section. I think that mentioning prevalence rates and lack of mental health services is important to inform the reader fully of why this topic is important. Also, it would be beneficial to elaborate on the different programs to highlight what is to come in the rest of the article.

Dr. Council
I think Alexis has the right length and tone for a lead for this type of article. She has left out details that the longer leads include, but that's okay. I think she does a good job of establishing that the topic is notable, and also make the lead interesting enough that you want to read the article. J.R. Council (talk) 06:24, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Feedback on Lead Sections by Serena Curran
Lauren G You did a good job defining the topic and introducing what will be in the rest of the article. It includes many details about the overall wiki page and brings in lots of information from the outline we created. One thing I would suggest is to possibly make some of the language more concise, as people mainly want to read the first couple sentences to get the gist, and then move on.

Alexis You did a good job describing the notability of the topic and keeping it concise while still hitting the major points. You could maybe include more information to preview what the subheadings of the article will be, as we did in our outline.

Lauren C Good job giving an overview of the article and explaining why it's important and what it is currently working on. I would say maybe some more specifics on some of those things they do would be a good thing to add.

Dr. Council
Serena's lead is also quite good. She hits the same key points that Alexis does, and gives a little more detail on LLL's social media presence and expansion to the US. I would retain this emphasis in the final lead section. J.R. Council (talk) 06:29, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Feedback on Lead Sections by Lauren Grant
Serena I thought you did a great job addressing their projects and programs! I think it might be a little more helpful to spend more time focusing on the actual foundation and the purpose of it, if that makes sense! Another thing is that I think some of the wording could be switched around to make it easier to read.

Alexis I thought you did an awesome job covering the main points. You got right to the point of what it is, why it was created, and what the purpose and aim of it is. I would also maybe add just a bit more about their projects and social media presence.

Lauren C Nice job covering the purpose of the foundation! I think I would add more about the stigma of mental health in India so people understand why this foundation is so important and more about why it was created (more specifically about India).

Laurengrant19 (talk) 19:28, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Council
Lauren's lead is more detailed, and you certainly want to get all these details into the final version of the article. However, I think this is a bit more detail than you need in the lead. J.R. Council (talk) 06:35, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Feedback on Lead Sections by Lauren C
Anyway, here is my feedback: This is also a nice and succinct yet interesting lead. I would want to know more after reading this. J.R. Council (talk) 06:43, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Am I missing something? There is peer feedback for every lead but Lauren C's.

Lauren Grant- This is really well done! You summarized the foundation and covered every area. The only thing that I can see that might be helpful is to give a little less information on the projects and social media presence so we can expand on it in a different section, but I also think they work in the lead section. I'm not really sure how in depth we want to go for the lead section, just something to keep in mind. Overall great job! Lcapp (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Alexis- Nice lead section! I think the only thing that could be added is some of the other foundation's it's working with and give a brief overview of the projects it is working on. Other than that I think it is really well done. Lcapp (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Serena-I think this is a very good lead section. You did a nice job covering all of the topics relating to this foundation and giving a brief summary. The only thing I can see that might be helpful to add is Deepika Padukone's struggle with depression which is another reason she started this foundation. Lcapp (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Overall feedback from Dr. Council
You all have done a great job on this. Good leads and good feedback, except no feedback for Lauren C.
 * For the final group lead for Assignment 7, I would take Alexis's as a starting point. J.R. Council (talk) 06:43, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Feedback
Very nice work on your draft.

The major issue is sourcing. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article. Only two of your 13 references are independent. You need to rely primarily of third-party sources, not the organization's website or its Twitter feed. The existing The Live Love Laugh Foundation article has better sourcing, but even that is a bit borderline.

The article should focus more on the group, and less on mental health in India. For example, the Background and Founder section should start with with something more like the third paragraph. I would open with something like

By doing this, you keep the Foundation at the forefront, and not mental health, or Padukone, or anything else. The first paragraph could follow that, and then the second.

I would also recommend that you change the layout of the articles a little bit. Having sections called "Mission", "Global presence" and "Social media presence" are likely to come across as promotional to many Wikipedians. Missions are really branding exercises - they aren't quite what an organization does, they're really just aspirational. Saying "it aims to spread awareness" is a bit like saying "I aim to go to the gym today" - it's only meaningful if you turn those aims into actions. Similarly, saying "It is a way for people to share and hear others' stories, letting them know that they are not suffering alone" isn't really the kind of simple description of facts that an encyclopedia article needs - you can "which has the benefit of..." (with a source, and a link to another article about the benefits of whatever the term for this might be).

Talking about what an organization does is useful information. It's something concrete.

The tone of the "Global presence" and "Social media presence" sections is also a bit promotional. For example, instead of writing:

you should strive for something more like

Instead of saying consider something like

You could follow it up by saying why they use these four languages. But start with the facts, and elaborate on them after.

Apart from this, there are a few straightforward fixes that need doing
 * * You need to make sure that each statement in the article can be connected to a source. The lead is fine (as long as everything in the lead section is covered in the body of the article) but everything else should have references. No paragraph should end without a reference.
 * Consider linking terms that the average reader might not be familiar with. The first section is fairly well linked, but beyond that, I think the only link was the one I added.
 * References go after punctuation, not before. Section headers should use sentence capitalization (only capitalize the first word and proper nouns) not title capitalization.

Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)