Talk:Urban Growers Collective

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 6 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Drocha7, Wsumme2, Jvasqu24. Peer reviewers: Faithberwick, Hmarli2, Gonzalez1011, Briefingkat.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review by Gonzalez1011

1. Fist of all, I liked the content box, how you highlighted the history, initiatives, etc. I liked that you put who the founders were, when the foundation was established, and the Where it was located. I also liked that you put your references up.

2. I think the article can improve if you offer links to certain things like CTA, you can link that to the CTA Wikipedia page, or you can link south and west side of Chicago to a Wikipedia page. The reason I think it's important to link it to a Wikipedia page Is that people who are not part of Chicago would maybe want to know more about the neighborhoods, or they might not know what CTA is. Another thing you can improve on is that you can put more details into the Gala's. There is not much information on it. For example, it seems that Theater on the Lake is an important part of the organization because that's where the gala's take place. Another thing I noticed is that you don't cite your work as much as you should. For example, in the Youth Camp and Touring Program, you wrote a long paragraph with a lot of details, but it wasn't cited until the end and it was only cited twice. Or in the history where it stated that Will Allen was a retires professional basketball player. I think that there should have been more sentences cited. I noticed that one of the sources takes you to a google map. I don't think it counts as a source. Instead of linking it to Google Maps you can link it to the news article where you read the information on where Urban Growers Collective was located. Also, I did link CTA, Chicago, West, South, and Theater on the Lake to Wikipedia pages and outside sources.

3. The most important thing you can do to improve the article would be to put more details into certain parts of the article. I did go to the news articles where you cited some of the galas and it seems like there's more you can add in there. Also, you can go into details with the CTA that sells fruits and vegetables. You can describe it a bit more. Another important thing to remember is to cite your sources a lot more, every 1-2 sentences.

4. The thing that I noticed in your article that I can use would be to find out more about the founders. Your article did have a clear history and it specified who was part of the organization and what the backstory was. Also, I think I can integrate separate points for certain things like in funding or partnerships. In general, I did like your article, it had good ideas, and went into detail on certain points. Also, and helped me with ideas to improve my own.

--Gonzalez1011 (talk) 18:27, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review by Faithberwick

1. First of all, the article does a really great job and categorizing the topic into subcategories. The History, Initiatives, Donors, and Events is a very clear and cohesive way of telling the narrative of your non-profit.
2. Here are some suggestions for improving the article, and some small edits I made:
   1. Generally, up to every 2 sentences should have a source. Under ‘History’, the first 2 sentences aren’t sourced. If they are both referenced from the same place, I would recommend sourcing the second sentence. (This carries on throughout the article, not just this sentence).
   2. Additionally, make sure to hyperlink any words of importance to other existing Wikipedia articles. For example, the MacArthur Foundation has a page you could link off to. You could also link off to Lori Lightfoot, locations, and other programs mentioned. I went ahead and started linking some things off for you. Having links to these sources help increase the understanding of the reader by connecting it to your topic.
   3. Under CTA Bus Markets, your paragraph is separated into 3 sub-sentences. I’m not sure if this is intentional or if it was just a copy-and-paste error. The reason I bring it to your attention is because the previous sub categories are not broken up that way, so I think it’s a good rule of thumb to remain consistent.
   4. Under Events, I added the actual locational address for Theater on the Lake in Chicago.
3. Here are some important things you can do right now to improve the article:
   1. Try making the sentences flow a bit more cohesively. Right now, the sentences are very short and abrupt. One way you can fix this is by combining 2 short sentences together to create a more thoughtful narrative. For example, under “Grounds for Peace”, the last sentence “This program lasts for 18 months” stands out awkwardly. I went and added this factor into the section sentence to read as “This 18 month long program combines non-profit organizations Urban Growers Collective and Heartland Alliance to connect urban farming and gardening initiatives with younger at risk males in the areas of Woodlawn, Englewood, and North Lawndale.”
   2. Overall, more information can be added. There seems to be a lack of substance under “Donors.” Perhaps if you’re struggling to find more information on that particular topic, you could interweave other information through subtopics/subheadings.
4. Something I noticed about your article that could be applicable to my own are the subcategories listed under “Initiatives” and “Events.” The way in which you organized the structure makes it very clear to follow. Currently, my groups article consists of 5 block paragraphs. So perhaps I can try following your model to make my article less overwhelming to read. All in all, great start! This is an awesome non-profit, I think it's a great choice.

--Faithberwick (talk) 02:40, 7 November 2019 (UTC)Fberwick

Peer Review by Hmarli2

1. The article is well-organized and your sources seem to be very reliable. The article is stated neutrally.
2. Here are some suggestions for the article:
   1. I would expand in more areas. How does Laurel Simms fit into the picture? I know that Erika Allen is the daughter of the first founder, but why did Laurel join? There seems to be a lot of information on Will Allen, but not much on the actual founders. Personally, I would just hyperlink to his wiki and delete some of the information explaining who he is. Also, is there any more information for the Galas? There is a lack of information there and maybe you could expand more on what happened at the Galas (i.e., Were they raising money for the organization or was it an event to celebrate something?). Since this is a relatively new group, I understand if you just do not have the sources or the information to be able to add on.
   2. For the Donor’s section, I would divide the different donors into different sections/subsections. It seems a bit cluttered and I believe that separating the unnamed donor and the City of Chicago’s donations into two different paragraphs would help. Another thing you could do is delete the section altogether and add those sentences in somewhere else within the article. Some of the information is repeated from earlier paragraphs so you could keep that information in those earlier paragraphs.
   3. To add on to Faith’s comment about how under Fresh Moves Mobile Market there are three paragraphs, if this was a copy and paste error, that is fine. If it was not, the way it is separated seems choppy since you have not separated the above paragraphs the same way.
3. Overall the most important thing is either trying to expand in areas, or work the sentences into other areas of the article. There does not seem to be a balanced coverage throughout the article. Once again, I understand if you do not have that information due to the nonprofit being relatively new; however, as Faith and I have both said, you could interweave the information into other areas to make the article flow better.
4. I noticed that you have organized some of your sections into subsections and I thought that was really interesting. For my article, we only have paragraphs and we have not divided it that way. I will try to apply that to my own article when I am editing it. Also, I realized that our article does not have much information on our founders either and that maybe we should remove or add more onto that. Your article really helped me to get a grip on what I should think about for my article! Another thing, I absolutely love your nonprofit and I think it was a brilliant choice.

Hmarli2 (talk) 21:43, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review by Briefingkat

1. Firstly, the article is great! I really like how clearly organized your layout is and how easy it is to find everything on your draft. It seems like you covered everything that was needed which is good! your layout is pretty minimalist, you have your History, initiatives, community involvement programs, Donors, Events and Gala's. This will definitely make it quicker for people to find information on the page so good work. 
2. I suggest making small edits to your page that I think adding more to your initiatives page would really help add more prime information about what your non profit is doing  terms of their goals. I was searching through your sources and I did find significant pieces of information with which you could use to add to the initiatives section, if you go back and read through the Chicago Tribune article and The CBS Chicago news article within your references page should give you good results. I would really suggest to just go back in once or twice and take down notes on things that you find that could possibly add more information to your sections, otherwise I think your going in a good direction with it.  
3. The most important thing you can do to improve your article would be to make sure you read through all your sources and collect as much information for your sections as possible, I would also suggest to read through your sections and check to make sure that small grammatical mistakes didn't accidentally slip by, I noticed some in your History section and I went ahead and made small edits to correct them so you should be all good as of now. otherwise I didn't see anything major missing from your page and everything looks pretty solid.  
4. One thing that I did notice that I believe would be beneficial to introduce to my own page would be the minimalist layout that you have going on for your sections, everything looks really clean and simple and since we have so much information for some of our sections I think we would really beneficial to be able to clean up our layout so that it is easier to follow. Overall I think what you've done with the page looks good and I think what your non profit is doing is really great! it was a really good choice of organization. 

Briefingkat (talk) 06:17, 11 November 2019 (UTC)