Talk:Ticket to Work

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Disability  
WikiProject icon Ticket to Work is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.

Untitled comment[edit]

I think that we need to split the CESSI part of the article from the main part describing Ticket to work. A new page should be created for CESSI.

Split CESSI/PMRO[edit]

This page is currently considered "orphaned." The way I understand that we need to fix this is by networking ourselves with other Wiki articles. For example, we need to link to this page from an SSA artile, ODEP, Dept. of Labor, Independent Living Center, etc. As far as I can tell, we do this by adding a link in the "edit this page" section of all articles that we feel are related in some way to the Ticket to Work Program. Also, we can go in the other direction and expand by linking to a PMRO article, which will link to a CESSI artice, Daniels & Associates Article, NCIL Article, etc. I'm drafting a PMRO and CESSI articles now.

Tickettowork (talk) 16:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Multiple issues - responding to EA request[edit]

This article has a lot of issues that need to be dealt with. First, it's not written in an encyclopedic manner - it's written as if it were part of a government webpage, using bullet points and similar structures. It's rather a lot like a guidebook instead of an encyclopedia article. I'd recommend that the editors here read the manual of style and look at articles for similar government programs to get a better idea of how to develop the article so it's got encyclopedic tone.

Second, and probably more importantly, it has no references - there are no sources, and thus it is very difficult to meet our verification requirements. I highly recommend that some references, preferably third-party external sources discussing the program's operation, be found and inserted immediately. Frankly, I'm surprised it's managed to stick around as long as it has without any - most of the time, something like this would be brought up for deletion rather quickly. Again, I suggest reviewing similar programs' articles for inspiration on this end. To get you all started, I've done this Google News Archive search: [1] It's got a few hundred articles linked, which should help provide a basis. (This one is a great starting point, actually, to provide some history, as is this one... and here is a more recent article.)

Once that's all done, I'd suggest looking up articles such as the Social Security Administration and others that are related to the topic at hand, and inserting links either as a "see also" or in the body where appropriate. That will help take care of the orphan problem.

I hope this helps. I'll watchlist the page and try to help out where I can. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I will be working to rectify these issues immediately. I appreciate being put on your watch list.

Tickettowork (talk) 18:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I have linked us with SSA, disability, Easter Seals, Independent Living, UCP, and some other articles under See Also. I want to link to as many as possible but for now, is this enough to have that caution removed? Tickettowork (talk) 18:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)