Talk:Wingman Project

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wingman Project article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

United States C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2020 and 27 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Jasdeep-SH, Go-editors, AprilGa91962893, Rpaylor, Adamash981, Markowijaya.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:55, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Impacts Section

This article could benefit from an Impacts section. This article does a good job laying out some of the details about the goals and inception of the organization, but doesn't have any information or updates from the last 10 years. Laying out some statistics about how many interactions the org has had, or the accomplishments made in the last few years could be beneficial for the article. Rpaylor (talk) 18:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

The introduction is a good start but could use a bit more information. Perhaps as more content is added to the article itself, there will be more to put in the introduction. Also, the article seems to be a bit incomplete. It could benefit from a section about what this program is currently up to, or a section about how the program itself actually works. The project goals section articulately does its job, however, and there are a large number of citations for an article of this size. The tone is very good as well.Adamash981 (talk) 21:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article could benefit from more sources and information. The introduction does a great job of laying out the concept and setting up the rest of the article, but the remaining sections do not have enough substantial information to back up all of the points the article is trying to make. Additionally, the article could benefit from the addition of credible sources that come from more than just website pages, especially in the “About the Wingman Project” section because it only covers up to 2012. How the project has continued or failed to continue in the past 8 years would be interesting to see. In the project goal section, including a paragraph on how they were or are working towards achieving that goal would be beneficial, and, lastly, the addition of a criticism and impact section covering what the Wingman project has done well or failed to do would tie the page together.AprilGa91962893 (talk) 05:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Evaluation

Positive Points

LEAD: The lead section is clear and does a good job of outlining the project and the primary actors. This could be helpful in serving as a general outline for the rest of the article.

CONTENT: There is detailed coverage of the Wingman project, as well as the project goals. Perhaps, to improve the article, these two sections can be reorganised as an “About” as well as a “History” section to distinguish between what the objectives are, as well as the conception of the initiative.

Areas of Improvement

BALANCE: The article does not cover different perspectives on the project, neither does it present details on the outcomes. The article does not have a “Critiques” or “Impacts” section, which could introduce significant viewpoints on the perspectives towards the Project.

SOURCES: Currently, the sources used are primarily from online websites and apps. This could be useful in showing what the project is officially described as, but risks rendering this article more of an advertisement, without academic sources. To improve the reliability of the article, it could be a good idea to use academic journal articles that analyse suicide prevention efforts in the US, including the Wingman Project.

SIGNIFICANCE OF ARTICLE: There does not seem to be much critical information that the Project shows. While the cause is important in itself, it is possible that this could be a subsection of a broader article, such as United States military veteran suicide epidemic. This could hence be repackaged. Otherwise, there could be new sections evaluating the project or exploring the social media presence of the Wingman Project, if any.

Jasdeep-SH (talk) 01:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

1. The introduction is short and sweet but could help with more information such as who started the project and the background of that person. 2. The article should also include the history of the project instead of 'About the Wingman Project' because the introduction is basically explaining what the project is about. 3. The article should include an 'Impact' section to show how effective has the project been preventing veterans from suicide, and if the project is still ongoing. Markowijaya (talk) 06:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]