User talk:Redpandas58

Welcome!
Hello, Redpandas58, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review by Redpandas58
1. First of all, I really like the chronological order of the organization in the "History" section. It creates a smooth transition and as a reader, I like seeing the history of an organization starting from the past and then making its way to the present. I also like that you included an "Accomplishments" section because now that I think of it, this is a common and frequent section in any Wikipedia article. It's something that I didn't think to add in my group's article so I appreciate that you did because it provides insight to the organization's recognition.

2. I will discuss my suggestions chronologically. I think the lead can be a bit more specific. For example, you say that the organization "interns the victims as the organization helps them," but you don't mention how they intern them or what they help them with exactly. For example, if they offer financial, or emotional support, I think that would be great to mention in the lead that way it gives the reader a better understanding of how they actually help victims. Although I like the chronological approach in the "History" section, I think the paragraphs can be integrated a bit more. This is because since each paragraph starts off with a date, it sounds a bit robotic; maybe adding some transition words, such as "additionally" will help link the paragraphs together. Next, I suggest to re-visit the "Missions" section. Given the bias nature of a mission statement, I feel that this section is advertising the organization instead of remaining neutral. Therefore, I suggest to remove this section or trim it down so that it's more fact-based while also writing it in an integrated way. Details from the "Mission" section regarding the harm reduction approach can be brought down to the "Programs" section because I think that is a more appropriate placement. I also suggest to make "Accomplishments" its own heading because it is separate from the "Mission" section. In terms of the "Programs" section, I suggest that the heading "Focuses on Healing/Recovery and Health Services" should be included in the "My life, my choice" subheading instead because it is relevant to that program. Finally, I feel that the "Criticisms" section is too opinion-based instead of fact-based. Instead of saying why you think criticisms exist for this organization, try finding actual media outlets or people that have critiqued them. This will make this section less bias and more reliable.

3. The most important thing is to be neutral. I can tell that you have a lot of passion and respect for this organization, but in a lot of the sections, it sounds too much like an advertisement, especially in the "Mission" and "Criticisms" sections.

4. Like I mentioned earlier, I really appreciate that you added an "Accomplishments" section. This is now something I am considering adding in my group's article because it sheds a light on the organization's contributions and recognition.

5. Some changes I made: I linked the Wikipedia page for "non-profit organization." I edited some sentences in the "History" section such as "they were former sex workers." I edited some sentences in the "Mission" section such as "The foundation tries to help as many victims get out of these situations, especially those in which they cannot get out of themselves."

Redpandas58 (talk) 00:52, 11 November 2020 (UTC)Redpandas58