User:Liagabrielafp/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?

Area:

Rio Alamar

Sector:

Community Development Planning

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I picked Community Development Planning since it is a crucial aspect of my org's mission. Diverse and often historically marginalized/under-presented communities contributing to the planning, direction of project implementations is crucial for collective empowerment, environmental justice, and social welfare in Tijuana. My preliminary impression was that it could benefit from adding the benefits of community development planning. Some of these are acknowledging interrelationships, deepening relationships, identifying priorities and addressing concerns, and government collaboration/cooperation. Potential case studies could also benefit readers.

I picked Rio Alamar since it is the area in which my organization is currently focusing its community development planning sector. This matters because the channelization of the binational river in the Tijuana portion has harmed the city's unique ecosystem. Industrial development has additionally contaminated both river and neighboring communities. The alliances, government, and binational collaborations my organization has engaged in for years has reflected that mitigating climate change impacts, educating on environmental issues, and sustainable participatory planning is possible through social agreements in regards to the river. My preliminary impression was that this 3-sentence article only focuses on extremely vague geography.

(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Evaluate the article

Rio Alamar:

There is little to nothing to work with in regards to the lead, content, and media sections since the 3-sentence article only describes the geographical location of the river. There are no sources and reference section although hyperlink to other locations (ex California) are included. It is thus obvious that Wikipedia’s equity gap is not addressed. It is crucial that contextualizing the complex environmental, political, and social history of the river addresses the underrepresented populations of the area. The article does however appear neutral, unbiased, and grammatically correct

This article is within the scope of 3 WikiProjects: Rivers, California, and Mexico. They all have rated it as stub-class, or as too short and incomplete to provide more than rudimentary information, on the project's quality scale. They have also rated its as a low importance on the project's importance scale. The article has additionally been marked as needing an infobox. The article is currently only subject to this GPP Wiki Education assignment and there is no conversations behind the scenes about how to represent the Rio Alamar.

The article's overall status is vague, minimal, and very poorly underdeveloped. The history, social factors, further physical descriptions, and relevance of the Rio Alamar are only some ways to improve this article.

Community Development Planning:

Insofar as the lead I would say that the introductory sentence in the five-sentence article concisely describes the term. The content is relevant but gives a very theoretical/abstract description that may not be easily understood by all. The article somewhat deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps since the term embodies transforming structural inequalities. Historically underrepresented populations and topics are better able to shape their living conditions, environments, governments, through community development planning. Although this is an emotionally charged subject to many the article remains neutral/unbiased and has no claim. There

are also no grammatical errors nor media although the language may again not be easily understood by all.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States and has no received a rating on the project's quality or importance scale. It was nominated for deletion on May 8th 2018 but the result of the discussion was no census. The discussion itself highlights the technicality, relevance, and criticalness of the term that 'deserves a wide section within any wiki project concerning public planning and development'.

I believe the last comment from the individual who nominated the deletion of the article reflects the article's overall status as underdeveloped. This is because the publisher (International City/County Management Association) of the one reference ('The Practice of Local Government Planning) is not authoritative on the subject of urban planning. It may also be true that explaining community development as part of the professional field could be more appropriate and less redundant. The continuation of the article is nonetheless an opportunity to add more depth. This could look like a history of the development of the term, past applications, more elaboration (how, why, when, etc) on certain included components (planning tools, helping coordinate, etc), further exploration of impacts, additional sources/references, and more.

(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)