Talk:Criticism of Employment Support Allowance
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 25 August 2017. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | The contents of the 2015 review of welfare benefits, addictions and treatable conditions page were merged into Criticism of Employment Support Allowance on December 2018. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
I've edited this to emphasise balancing views, where possible. See discussion on Articles for Deletion page for background. Dr Greg Wood (talk) 10:43, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Neutrality of Article edit
The point of this article seems to be to portray the WCA, the DWP and ATOS in as negative light as possible. It covers no praise for the WCA or even the perspective that the WCA doesn't go far enough. I am working on removing strongly biased sections and adding some right-wing perspectives on the WCA. Dr Greg Wood, I have put a message on your talk page about your strong opinions which you have expressed in the article.CircleGirl (talk) 07:36, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Length of Article and Detail edit
Another issues with the article is that it is too long. It is 158Kb and WP:TOOBIG reconmends that articles should be around 30-50kb for most readers to read them comfortably. I feel it is overly detailed. It looks more like someone has written a case study into the failings of the WCA rather than an encyclopedia article. CircleGirl (talk) 08:37, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
I have shortened the article and I have now removed the too long template.CircleGirl (talk) 00:32, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
I have removed excessive detail and removed the too detailed tag.CircleGirl (talk) 00:43, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Requested move 22 December 2018 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved - well-stated case with no opposition, opting to rename as the article will need work anyway (c.f. NPOV) as it fits the current scope. (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 14:20, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Criticism of the Work Capability Assessment → Criticism of Employment Support Allowance – The scope of the current article is very narrow. For those unfamiliar with the Work Capability Assessment, it is a test for the eligibility for Employment Support Allowance, the UK's main out-of-work sickness benefit. Some of the criticisms of the WCA actually are about ESA as a whole. I.e. the fiscal effectiveness section. As well as this, the article is very one-sided. It gives the impression that everyone in the UK apart from the Department for Work and Pensions is opposed to the WCA. As I have shown in the Initial Reception section, some sections of British society were very pleased about the WCA. The new title meets WP:AT CircleGirl (talk) 09:54, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.