Talk:Population and Community Development Association

Peer Review from Politics of Developing Nations Class

This looks like a great start of an article, with a lot of good-quality information. I realize it's still being worked on, so I assume the stub sections of "Women's Health and Maternity" and "Poverty Reduction" will be taken care of. I think the formatting for the "Strategies" section could be improved simply by making the headlines above the bullet-points bold. Also, the HIV/AIDS section seems to have a lot of important information, but it needs more citations. There should be at least one in every paragraph there. I think this article could also benefit from having more internal links. Wikipedia really likes having internal links for all its articles. For example, the first sentence of this article could read "The Population and Community Development Association (PDA) is a is a non-governmental organization in Thailand, founded by Mechai Viravaidya." Other than that, I didn't really have anything in the way of copy-edits; spelling, grammar, and punctuation all looked fine to me. The only thing I would watch out for is switching tenses. There are several places in the article where it makes sense to write in past tense, specifically when discussing past events; otherwise, the entire article really should be in present tense. This is most noticeable in the HIV/AIDS section.

Keep editing! It's coming along. I have no doubt your article will be accepted as a complete Wikipedia article soon! Kit.i.t. (talk) 02:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I was just about to write the same thing about internal links that Kit noted. You should definitely insert those links to other Wiki articles. I somewhat disagree on the strategies section. I think you'd do better to turn the section into a paragraph format with full sentences instead of bullet points.

On the third paragraph of the introduction, the first sentence doesn't really match the rest of the paragraph. once thinks you are going to talk about child mortality but then give us all these details about family planning. Can you make the paragraph fit together more logically?

Maybe break the paragraph under Mission and Purpose into three paragraphs. It's original goals (written in past tense), its gradual adoption of more expansive goals (past tense), and a paragraph on its current development efforts (present tense).

I think you need to expand on the timeline section. You might to this as a bulleted list with years at the first thing: 1976: PCDA founded by ....; 1978:..... that sort of thing

I agree with Kit on the verb tense issue.

I'd change the header from Thai Government to Relationship with Thai Government

Clearly, Sasia's sections need to be expanded but I assume that's coming

Prof M Johnson (talk) 03:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Your overall looks great and has great quality information. I think it would be beneficial to expand on the timeline section maybe by using bullet point.(similar to what Professor Johnson was talking about above) I also know you are still working on this page, so I'm assuming that the "Women's Health and Maternity" will be expanded upon. To expand that section I thought you could possibly answer/touch upon

Is it easy for women to access all types of healthcare or just family planning solutions?

When it comes to labor laws, do women get time off for maternity leave? If so, how long and do they get compensated for lost time at work?

Should the sex trafficking go underneath this? Or should it have it's own section? If it did go underneath here... what laws are there their to protect women? Does Thailand even have any? What are the NGO's, Goverment, and any other organizations in Thailand doing to reduce sex trafficking?

Your page setup looks great and it's easy to follow through. I think it would look nice to have some pictures especially in the "Strategies" section. This section had alot of information on what they did to promote family planning, but as I was reading it I wondered:

Have any of these strategies been more effective than others?

Are some of them used more frequently than others?

After reading, I made a couple grammatical changes. Your page looks and sounds great! I wish you luck on getting it reviewed to be a complete Wiki article. It deserves to be one. Great work ladies! Samewat2013 (talk) 20:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Population and Community Development Association/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Neelix (talk · contribs) 18:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Tick list

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

• Incoming links - There are not enough articles on Wikipedia that link to this one. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Lede - All information in the lede should appear in the body of the article. The sources for the information in the lede should be provided where that information appears in the body rather than where that information appears in the lede. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Founder - This section should not be mostly, let alone entirely, sourced by the person about whom it is written. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Strategies - This section should be rewritten paragraphically and more thoroughly sourced. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Role of Thai government - I agree with Prof M Johnson above that "Relationship with Thai government" is a more fitting title for this section. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Sections relating to issues being targeted - The "Women's health and maternity," "HIV and AIDS," and "Poverty reduction" sections should be grouped in a subheading called "Services" or something similar. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Women's health and maternity - This section relies entirely on a single source. More references should be added. The first two sentences of this section are not written from a neutral point of view. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Unwanted pregnancies - This should be a subheading using ='s rather than bolding. There are a large number of weasel words in this section that should be replaced or removed. Examples include "alarming statistic," "quacks," and the use of the term "abortion" in the background paragraph replaced by the term "termination" in the paragraphs dealing with the PDA. The sentence-long paragraphs should be consolidated into a single paragraph and sourced. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• HIV and AIDS - The first two paragraphs of this section belong on the HIV/AIDS in Thailand article. Background information should be limited to that which is directly related to the PDA by the sources. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Criticism - This section should be expanded. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• See also - This section contains many links that are too far removed from the topic of this article to justify inclusion.

[reply here]

• Spelling - There are multiple spelling errors in the article that should be fixed. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[reply here]

• Images - Relevant images should be found and included. Neelix (talk) 19:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I see no significant edits in the article since the review, and with no sign of life here, I suggest failing due to no activity. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 21:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)