Natashaliu1993

I will need to evaluate an existing Wikipedia article here. Natashaliu1993 (talk) 23:23, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I choose to review and edit the Wikipedia page for public administration. I learned some new things from the article and it also reinforced much of my current knowledge about what public administration is and some of the history of the field. The article effectively shows the many facets of the field and how it is both an area of academics and of practice. I like how there are many definitions listed and sourced and then the definitions section just towards the end defines public administration as having many definitions and also claims there is dispute over whether public administration is a subfield of political science or of administrative science. I feel like the page could expand more on the relationship between bureaucracy and public administration. Upon doing a control + find on the article, I found the word with "bureau" root 14 times, and not once in the definition heading which is also the first subtitle. I think the link between bureaucracy and public administration could be pointed out more clearly. I could use Goodsell's definition of bureaucracy found on page 54 of the Taking Sides book as a source. He defines bureaucracy as referring to the institutions of public administration in America. Also, this article seems to have a strong focus on public administration and its history in America. We could use a better world-view of the topic. There is a list of public administrative institutions in other countries and a section on international public administration, which is nice. Also... is Woodrow Wilson considered the only father of public administration in America?

There is a citation needed under the History section subtitle "1950s to the 70s", which is a type size smaller than the other History subtitles for some reason? The information that needs to be cited is " Brownlow subsequently founded the Public Administration Service (PAS) at the university, an organization which has provided consulting services to all levels of government until the 1970s." While I'm reviewing the history section, I want to point out that the article distinguishes that there are generations of public administration theorists... is there a trend of the 40s-50s theorists, the 50s-70s theorists, or the 80s-90s theorists that we can notice a general trend or common belief within one generation?

Next up... the approaches section definitely needs some beefing up and expanding what these terms are. A box suggests editing to turn the list into prose. That may be a good idea. I think these approaches need to be cited too, who came up with these ideas or are they original work (not meant for Wikipedia)

Very good article, the author is extremely thorough when it comes to certain details.They address the concerns they have with the article and provide adequate examples on how to improve it. I would look forward to reading the final draft. 20:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)