| Revision as of 23:46, 14 March 2017 editJingwu1104 (talk | contribs)39 edits Peer Review← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:59, 15 March 2017 edit undoEJustice (talk | contribs)165 edits →Feedback from Prof. Gelobter: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| Hi, I'm Jing, the last one who peer reviews your article. The article has a fairly clear structure. The sections of EPA and Health Acess will be quite detailed which is great. I think the writer can expand more content in the immigration policy which only has one subtopic right now. In addition, there should more resources and citation in the next step of writing. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Hi, I'm Jing, the last one who peer reviews your article. The article has a fairly clear structure. The sections of EPA and Health Acess will be quite detailed which is great. I think the writer can expand more content in the immigration policy which only has one subtopic right now. In addition, there should more resources and citation in the next step of writing. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| == Feedback from Prof. Gelobter == | |||
| Overall a good start. Your section headings might work better if they were more specific...like "Impact on Immigration Policy on Environmental Right/Safety" | |||
| An important topic, so work on getting a strong scaffold/outline to make your big points! | |||
| Also check out overlaps with https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Mrubin1996/sandbox | |||
| --] (]) 01:59, 15 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:59, 15 March 2017
Peer Review
Hey, my name is Tina, and I am one of your peer reviewers for your article and what you have done so far!
I really like your group's four categories. I think there is a lot of potential for expansion there and to really cover all aspects of this important topic. I think your group has a really good start going on here and a good direction to keep working towards. I'm not sure if you are already planning on adding this, but adding some information about the current travel bans/deportation policies being implemented and how that will affect undocumented farm workers could be a good addition. Information about any countermeasures or efforts by California to protect these workers could be some good information to add as well.
Like I said, I like your organization thus far and the direction you guys are heading towards. If you want someone to take a look at your article again once it is a bit more fleshed out (idk if we are going this in class or not), let me know!
Hpw27 (talk) 22:07, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Hey, I'm Catherine, I'm another one of your peer reviewers!
It seems like you guys have a pretty solid foundation of your wiki page. The four categories that you've chosen to focus on seem clearcut and will probably cover everything that I would want out of this wiki page. I would just be careful that the subsections you're using aren't too broad; you might get somewhat overwhelmed with all the information that you find is relevant to those categories. However, I like that you are focusing on California as this narrows down the focus of your page. If it's appropriate it may also be useful to add a Justice section to your article or mention how your topic explicitly relates to environmental justice in order to tie it back to the broader themes and issues of the class (if you don't want to add an entire section, you could maybe include this part in your overview).
Some things I'd hope to see on this page (I'm not sure if you're already planning on adding them): Where the majority of undocumented workers are concentrated (or if they're spread out around California). Are there some that have been treated better than others? How Trump's administration will affect these workers. How does California compare to the rest of the US when it comes to undocumented workers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berkeley17 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Maddy and I'm also peer reviewing your article.
I think that the major topics and sub-topics you have chosen look like they have a lot of potential for expansion. One suggestion I have is to move the History section further up in the article, and use it to set a foundation for the other topics. I like that you have chosen to analyze workers in California specifically, as it will allow you to narrow your focus . I also like that you have included EPA policy, specifically under the Trump administration.
I feel that each of your major topics could have "history" as a sub-section in addition to an overall "history" section for state policy in general. This could help organize past policies and contrast them with recent policy changes.
You look like you have a good start at a very interesting topic! Mcmonty2357 (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Peer Review
Hi, I'm Jing, the last one who peer reviews your article. The article has a fairly clear structure. The sections of EPA and Health Acess will be quite detailed which is great. I think the writer can expand more content in the immigration policy which only has one subtopic right now. In addition, there should more resources and citation in the next step of writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jingwu1104 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Feedback from Prof. Gelobter
Overall a good start. Your section headings might work better if they were more specific...like "Impact on Immigration Policy on Environmental Right/Safety"
An important topic, so work on getting a strong scaffold/outline to make your big points!
Also check out overlaps with https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Mrubin1996/sandbox