Talk:Capuchin Soup Kitchen

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 February 2019 and 12 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): PR Course, Fraterseraphicus, TinaD123, Riim22.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review

I really liked the lead and the history a lot. Both contents are very concise and straight forward yet narrative enough to explain what is needed. Seems like your group has the right idea of how the article should be written, which is great.

Some suggestions...

• the section and sentence for "Meldrum Soup Kitchen" seems to not have a narrative state yet, but I feel like it isn't necessary to put quotation marks over the work "now" in that sentence, because it seems like it is a fact that the Meldrum Soup Kitchen is about a block away from the original one.
• I'm questioning myself whether there is a certain schedule or time frame the soup kitchens serves food...and if there is, can that maybe be added to the article?
• I'm a bit confused about how the sentence... "There are five men in the program and six graduates," was implemented. What exactly do you mean? or what are their contributions? are they the people who run the program?...This is under the section, On the Rise Bakery & R.O.P.E Program.
• Daniel Akerson isn't the chairman or CEO anymore for GM. Try to resphase it to "former chairman/CEO"
• http://www.fox2detroit.com/good-day/truckloads-of-hope-donation-drive-march-1-30 This link may help since it's pretty recent and may add on to the sections where there are car dealer partnerships.

Overall, the article seems to be well written. Just needs the rest of the citations in and a bit of narrative editing towards the end. Good job with the usage of citations towards the beginning of the article.

--Numbah9 (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review

Your article has a lot of information which is good. I felt really informed reading it,I especially enjoyed the history. A suggestion that I have is that you can place what is called a infobox in you paper, which can be founded under templates. After you click on templates you can type in infobox organization, from there you will be given options of information you can add to your infobox. From there you just pick the ones you want and fill out the information. It helps when you have a lot of information but are trying to find something quickly.

Your links are really insightful and helpful. While looking through your article I found some words you might also want to link and took it upon myself to like them for you. Words: Monastery, Chapel, Ford Field and Nonprofit organization.

Also I found and fixed some minor grammatical errors. Under Meldrum Soup Kitchen, in the second sentence "it" being the first word is not capitalized. But also I'm not sure if you want to keep this sentence here or if you would want to delete it. I think you should look into this sentence. Another, can be found under On the Rise Bakery & R.O.P.E Program, in the middle of the first sentence there is a "Which" that is capitalized. The last one that I founded was under DTG Energy and DNV GL, in the first sentence after listing "natural gas" there isn't a comma separating natural gas from water heaters.

Lastly, your references have a Check date values suggestion you should look at it to see if you can fix the references that have it. You probably shouldn't be using a PR Newswire source.

But overall you have a really good article that with a few minor changes can be a really great Wikipedia article, that people are going to be very glad was created.

PR Course (talk) 01:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review

I really loved how this group used many sources throughout the article. I liked that y'all had a lot of information and the sources to back them up. I also liked the way the article is formatted, it was easy to understand and I found everything I was looking for in a timely manner. I didn't have to search for ever, because the way y'all formatted.

Suggestions:

• I just found a couple of grammatical errors throughout the article such as capitalizing the first letters in the words "Capuchin Soup Kitchen" it was just a couple times throughout the article that y'all didn't capitalize all three letters.

• I also seen that you're not allowed to go into the nexus uni links. So I suggest you should try to figure out a way to get that link to open for others to see.

Besides that I feel that our group has covered everything you could work on to make your article better, but I feel that this is a very strong article with lots of great information. You guys did a good job.

Souljaslim808 (talk) 15:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Notes

Hi! I have some notes:

• Be careful of redundancy with sentences. Some of them start with the same words or nearly the same words, so in cases like these you can typically merge the sentences together. For example, I did some tweaking to the Meldrum section for this reason.
• For the other kitchen location, the term pilot areas is a little vague. It'd be better to just have it say something like "located in pilot areas such as (location)". If you don't have the information, it's better to leave it off. I've tightened this some.
• The sentence in the Spiritual Care Center section is kind of clunky and vague.
• With the partnerships, sponsorships, and grants section, you don't really need to go into a lot of detail about each one or say exactly what each group did. Much of this will be kind of a bit superfluous to Wikipedia, as Wikipedia takes more of a general stance on things. I'd really only go into detail if there's a lot of coverage over the specific partnership/etc in independent, reliable sources.
• The legal settlements section needs more sourcing for the embezzlement case to show where this specific instance should be included in the article and to this much extent. The settlement part is really vague in the others part of the section, as it doesn't say what was going on to make them need a settlement. When it comes to legal issues it's good to apply caution, so I'd only include things if there's enough coverage to justify it and to explain what happened.
• The impact and demographics section needs to be tightened. I have made a potential re-write of the section and posted it below the original. The important thing with sections like this is to focus on just the data and not go into too much detail about the services, as those are already listed in the above sections. On a side note, the sourcing is a little vague - for example, one just shows up as "Knapp, Jeffrey. "Nexis Uni". CC Advisor", which doesn't really say a whole lot about the source. If pulling on a specific headline, make sure that you include as much of the information as possible so that people can find and access the source if they chose.
• Generally speaking the sourcing is OK, but make sure that it has all of the information per what I wrote above. I'd also definitely try to continue to look for non-primary sources about the kitchen that put a large focus on it. Be very cautious when it comes to sourcing about the partnerships, donations, and such, as these are often just reprinted press releases and some may focus more heavily on who is donating the money as opposed to where it's going, especially if the company is more focused on using it to improve their image than really doing good.

I think that you have a good base here, so some of this is really just continuing to tweak, improve, and format as needed. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)