User:Jerichorajninger/Choose an Article

Article Selection

Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

Article title

Criminal justice reform in the United States

Article Evaluation

Lead:

Rather uninformative, in that it only talks about criminal justice organizations rather than providing a general overview of the criminal justice reform movement. Reading the lead, I don't get a good idea of what the article will be about. The first sentence, while concise and clear, is rather narrow in scope, only listing a variety of CJ organizations. The lead is also rather short — lots of room to expand.

Content:

The overview of different approaches to criminal justice reform — sentencing reform, policing, reentry, etc. — is expansive and detailed. I think what's lacking is perhaps a more specific discussion of brutal and inhumane conditions inside prisons, which is a big impetus for just system reform. No section addresses prison conditions explicitly. Some of the summaries for CJ reform in the different U.S. states is rather brief, which isn't too helpful. I think adding a history of CJ reform could also be helpful.

Tone and balance:

I like how the article provides both "for" and "against" arguments in laying out the reasons for reform. In this way, the authors have provided a neutral perspective. The tone is clear and professional.

Sources and references:

Sources are provided on most factual claims, and there are often multiple citations at the end of a sentence, which points to widely acknowledged facts. The types of sources are also diverse, ranging from newspaper articles to research by advocacy organizations to books written by experts.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The separate section dedicated to reform efforts by state is a good way to organize the article, as reform efforts vary widely depending on where you are in the U.S. I also think the divisions between describing different approaches to reform and then separately outlining the arguments in favor or against them.

Images and Media:

Images could use some work. The only images included depict Barack Obama visiting a prison, which both makes the article partisan and also doesn't display diverse representations of what criminal justice reform can look like.

Talk page discussion:

Conversations on the Talk page are minimal, but discussion is cordial.

Overall Impressions:

A good start class page, but there are places to expand!

Sources

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/advocacy/prisons/u-s.htm

https://www.aclu.org/issues/prisoners-rights/cruel-inhuman-and-degrading-conditions

https://impactjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/IJ-Eating-Behind-Bars-Release1.pdf

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/12/08/solitary_symposium/

Option 2

Article title

Participatory action research

Article Evaluation

Lead:

Great lead! It's in depth and comprehensive, yet concise and digestible, too. There are citations (something that seems to be lacking from some leads) and the article presents PAR in a way that is quickly and easily understandable. Few improvements to make there I think.

Content:

There is robust content here, which is why I'm surprised it's labelled a Start class by Wikipedia. I think the Overview section is detailed and expansive and provides a deeper but still digestible explanation of PAR. Based on my own personal research, I'd want to add a section on criminal justice reform — an important application of PAR that isn't mentioned here. In particular, I think the section on ethics is important and a great inclusion to this article, as PAR can quickly become exploitative if not practiced correctly.

Sources and references:

Citations are pretty consistent throughout, although there are some sections that have no sources at all, most notably the ethics section. Within that entire section, there are only two citation. As a result, this section (which, I think, is the most important section of the article) is lacking support and credibility. Beyond this section, there is an abundance of sources on this article (187) that suggests well-researched and supported content.

Organization and Writing Quality:

Looks pretty okay to me!

Images and Media:

There is only one image and it's a rather dry and uninformative diagram — I'd suggest changing this image to one that depicts, for example, researchers and participants sitting at a table together (or else another scene that gives reader a better idea of what PAR is and does).

Talk page discussion:

Has not been edited in 5 years! That says something about how up-to-date the page is, and considering how rapidly fields such as this evolve, it's important to update the Wikipedia information on it.

Overall Impressions:

The content is well-developed, but I would want to add a section on criminal justice and also improve the citations in the Ethics section (and also maybe expand that section).

Sources

https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2013-42570-024.pdf?auth_token=594136f9fd9121e2e648fae6bf33b9ebcb6e2790

https://www.sfu.ca/~palys/Dupont-2008-PARwithMarginalizedPopulations.pdf

www.jstor.org/stable/40056546

http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2961187

Option 3

Article title

Prison abolition movement

Article Evaluation

Lead:

Succinct and detailed introduction with sources included. First line Is highly informative and clear — I learn what prison abolition is right when I open the page. I do, however, take issue with the focus on anarchism in the lead and the implication that anarchism serves as the inspiration or root of abolitionist movements, which is clearly not the case. I'd take out anarchism from the lead and move it down further where it can be discussed in adequate depth.

Content:

Overall a little underdeveloped. The history section is extremely short and does not account for the rich and deep history of prison abolition in the U.S. There is also no mention of other countries in this article (something that was mentioned in the Talk page), which is concerned given this article is not specifically confined to the U.S.

Tone and balance:

The section on arguments for abolition dwarfs the section on arguments against — the two are laughably different in size. I think this points to a skewed point of view, with more attention paid to arguments in favor of these reforms. While that is also my personal belief, the section on arguments against abolition is too small to foster meaningful and productive debate over the efficacy of abolition.

Sources and references:

There could be more citations — full paragraphs are written without reference.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The organization of the "Arguments made for prison abolition" section is most strange: It appears this section is organized into bullet points with explanations beneath them, but I have never seen an official Wikipedia page organized in this way. I think that section needs to be further developed so the arguments for prison abolition are presented in a fully formed way.

Images and Media:

The chosen image is obscene (uses the F-bomb) and depicts an anarchist banner. This is unacceptable for a Wikipedia page. Not only is it inappropriate but it depicts prison abolitionists in a certain way that is not conducive to productive and accurate discussion. Change.

Talk page discussion:

The most involved and developed Talk page I've encountered. Long discussions over content, sources and neutrality that was informative.

Sources

https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1490/

https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/glj104&section=48

https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/hlr133&section=4

https://www.akpress.org/areprisonsobsolete.html

Option 4

Article title

Article Evaluation

Sources

Option 5

Article title

Article Evaluation

Sources