Talk:Data politics
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CaitlinMMurphy. Peer reviewers: Torimcneely, ErinPapadimitriou.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Peer Review[edit]
Hi Caitlin!
After reading what you've got so far two things are clear: you have a solid understanding of what a Wikipedia article is supposed to look like, as well as an understanding of the topic you have chosen. Your lead is really strong which sets the reader up for what they are about to learn about the topic (there is not confusion or surprise). It gives equal weight to all topics that you are going to discuss.
I like how you state, “The principles behind open government data are…”. This really fulfills the requirement that Wikipedia content remain neutral. You seem to have a really good list of sources that seem to be reliable.
One suggestion would be to define data prior to defining political data. Or link to a Wikipedia article on data. I know you still have lots more to write (so I am not sure whether or not you already planned to do this) but I think a good way to illustrate each type of political data is to provide examples!
I read this article a little while ago on the rise of data and death of politics for another class of mine and thought maybe you could use it. Regardless it might be an interesting read for you regarding your topic.
Good luck with the rest of your article!
Erin's Peer Review[edit]
Caitlin,
The structure of your article is really good ! In addition to that your lead section is great.
You seem to have a pretty balanced coverage of information and subsections, just wondering if there might be anything else to add!? The big data section to me seems a bit distracting from the article and maybe could be used in a "See Also" section. All your sources seem to be reliable, relevant and up to date.
Great work so far !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ErinPapadimitriou (talk • contribs) 05:10, 9 November 2017 (UTC)