User talk:Davidajeanne/sandbox

AHIS 320 Peer Review
I appreciate your choice of subject matter for the Wikipedia article as I think that it is an important article to expand upon. Your inclusion of the (AIM) Program section makes sense and I believe is a necessary part of the article. Just as a general note - I don't believe we should be using direct quotations in our articles as this is called "plagiarism of cited sources" - where you copy the source and credit the author. The sentences should be summary of the information you have gathered in your own words. I noticed many quotations throughout your work, so this would be something that I would suggest you look at before handing in your Wikipedia Project. I think that brief quotations are okay (especially the important ones required for understanding), however there are quite a few in the article and they take up a lot of the text. For instance, in your section titled "Effect on Parenting, Communities", I would not begin this section with a quote, but rather, an overview of these effects in your own words before going into details. This also creates a different tone, and I think in your final draft it would be useful to go back and edit for a more "encyclopedic feel" (so that the "writer is invisible to the reader" - find more information here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Tone) You offer important information in this section to properly illustrate the impact of the AIM program/Sixties scoop. In your final submission I would suggest linking some of your concepts (ie. Blakstocks organization, Assembly of First Nations.. Etc) to existing Wikipedia articles so that people can reach other articles to gather more information about the topic. I appreciate that in addition to adding sections you are also expanding on existing ones. It is evident that you have done lots of research and spent time organizing it into respective sections. At the time when I reviewed your article you had 1,413 words, so I think you should expand a little to meet the requirements of our course. Overall your engagement with the topic is good and I think the information that you are adding is valuable. I think the things you should focus on improving would be your use of quotations, expanding your article generally, and putting things in a concise way in your own words to make it more accessible to the reader.

CrescentEvi (talk) 17:43, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review
I am glad you chose to improve upon this very important article as I believe it could use more information considering the important place in history the Sixties Scoop has. You use all very neutral tones throughout the whole article, which is very helpful for establishing an unbiased and informative article. Though I understand wanting to add quotations, I am not sure you should be quoting from direct sources in Wiki articles. Generally, you should paraphrase when possible and try to avoid using quotations. For example, in the adopt Indian Metis program you quote the CBC article several times when this could be easily avoided. Maybe instead of saying:

A CBC News clip produced after the project’s first year shows several Indigenous children playing as the reporter, Craig Oliver, tells viewers that they are only a few of the hundreds of “unwanted Indian and Métis children” ages six weeks to six years who are in need of homes. “They are the products of a sudden and sharp rise in illegitimate births and marriage breakdowns among Indian and Métis people.”

You could say something along the lines of:

A CBC News clip produced after the project’s first year shows several Indigenous children playing as the reporter, Craig Oliver, tells viewers that these Metis and Indian Children are only a few of the hundreds of unwanted children from first nations families. The reporter claims that the children are a product of illegitimate births and marriage failures among First Nations families, and this spike in family problems has caused for First Nations children to be adopted into Caucasian families.

From here you could potentially go on to explain why this happened and if what the reporter is saying is true or not, based on facts gathered from other sources. You also start with quotations several times and I believe under the Wikipedia guidelines, long lengthy quotes are not acceptable for a good article. Again, for these quotations perhaps you could paraphrase and than explain further. Also, I noticed the original article does have a lot of lengthy quotations, and I am not sure that would be considered appropriate for Wikipedia either. The page I chose to improve upon also has several lengthy quotations and I noticed it says “This article contains too many or too-lengthy quotations for an encyclopedic entry” which leads me to believe that the use of many quotations may not be appropriate in a Wikipedia article.

I think the statistics and direct examples do a lot for this article and I really appreciate the addition of them throughout. I also find the “Notable Scoops” to be a very interesting section and would love if you expanded even further upon why Nakuset’s accomplishments are important(that despite being taken from her family and culture has been very successful) and what else she has done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radicalarhea (talk • contribs) 00:01, 7 April 2018 (UTC)