Talk:Sugary drink tax
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sugary drink tax article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months |
Food and drink: Beverages Start‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taxation (inactive) | ||||
|
Sugary drink tax received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
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): Djb375.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
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): Klwymer, G.hernandez1991, A139053, Samdrews.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Well written article with slight flaws Mirzal Bachmid (talk) 04:09, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
This was a really well written article with a lot of articles from neutral sources being used such as the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition and the World Health Organization. It also incorporated a section that talked about the tax that is applied around the world, further elaborating on its effectiveness and longevity, which helped add depth to the Wikipedia article. Whilst it did use articles that were neutral like academic literatures, it did use news articles, which have a tendency to be slightly biased, such as CNN and BBC. The article also did not have any grammatical inconsistencies and it also used the appropriate language that reinforces the author's neutrality. To encapsulate, the Wikipedia article deserved a B rating because it demonstrated depth, talking about a range of topics including the reason the tax was implemented in the the harm of excess sugar and the against the tax, a certain degree of credibility, apt grammatical use and a neutral tone. It did not used obtain a good article because it did use some articles that could be slightly biased, which could jeopardize the neutral tone the author attempted to incorporate within the article.
summary : is it neutral?
The present version of the summary reads : "This policy intervention is an effort to decrease obesity and the health impacts related to being overweight, however the medical evidence supporting the benefits of a sugar tax on health is of very low certainty." The last part of the sentenced is relate to a unique study. I suggest 1/ splitting this long sentence into two sentences 2/reformulating the second part in "the the benefits of a sugar tax on health are disputed, and of low certainty according to some studies".Reneza (talk) 16:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)