Talk:Greater Chicago Food Depository

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Standingdreamer, Whoisbren, Drax Gon Give It To Ya, Colin.kane, Bford23, Julian Hartsfield. Peer reviewers: Femachisma, Tsundra, Hherra2, Covfefe22, Gsalaz6, Mapzo.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

{{request edit}}

I work for the Food Depository, so a conflict of interest prohibits me from making edits. This article is out of date. I recommend these updates to the statistics in the second sentence to reflect the current year. Thanks for reviewing.

[redacted]

12.216.81.218 (talk) 17:13, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I've redacted the text you proposed, because it's copied from the GCFD website; unless you're the person authorized to grant licenses for reuse of GCFD's intellectual property, this is a copyright infringement. Nyttend (talk) 02:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

In-Group Notes

I added GCFD's motto to the infobox, but I can't figure out how to move it from the top of the infobox. I think it looks dumb at the top, but think the information is good to have. So if anyone else could figure out how to move it down a little that'd be sick. Bford23 (talk) 03:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

I am working on this article for class, and I noticed that the sources in this article are all from the Greater Chicago Food Depository. There is currently no mention of their annual hunger walk. Here are some of the sources that my classmates and I have found: http://abc7chicago.com/society/support-food-pantries-and-shelters-at-the-hunger-walk/2368967/

http://www.dailyherald.com/business/20170922/buddig-donates-food-encourages-participation-in-hunger-action-month

http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/arlington-heights/community/chi-ugc-article-greater-chicago-food-depository-to-benefit-fr-2017-05-02-story.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-cook-county-food-insecurity-0504-biz-20170503-story.html

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/06/26/homeless-shelters-starbucks-greater-food-depository/

Would love for your feedback and input. Thanks! Standingdreamer (talk) 21:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

More Peer Review

Some contents from the article is biased. Please refer to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view to to what words to use. Here are some sentences that I thought were biased:

• "striving to end world hunger.." (lead)
• "the program ferried.."(History- 3rd paragraph)
• "topped 25 million pound" (History- 4th paragraph)

These are some examples I found, but I know I miss some words so reread the article. Programs listed from the organization lack citations. Refer to Wikipedia:Citing sources for a guideline to cite sources. Here are potential sources to use:

• http://abc7chicago.com/community-events/32nd-annual-hunger-walk/2420425/ Hunger Walk
• http://abc7chicago.com/news/share-the-joy-the-greater-chicago-food-depository/1664077/

If no references is made about Pantry University, I would recommend that you delete it. However, if you find outside source about the topic then you should cite that source instead. Femachisma (talk) 19:49, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

The article contains a lot of information and gives a good description of what the GCFD does, but there are a lot of headings and you could consider putting some of these headings together. For example, all of the partnerships you talk about happened in 2016 and 2017 so instead of having a heading for each with one to three sentences (some of which sound like advertisement) you can have one heading called Partnerships then tie them all together in one paragraph. This will make it more readable and allow you to cut down on some of the advertisement speak such as "Starbucks' new Mercato Menu", the name of the menu or that it is new isn't necessarily relevant.

Also consider putting more citations throughout in order to support information under each heading. Many are only cited at the end of the paragraph, or not at all. If all of them came from the same source, consider putting them together under a common heading so they don't go uncited.

Mapzo (talk) 15:26, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

More review

I understand that this article was a stub and was created years before this group was assigned to expand upon it. Many of my criticisms may not have originated from your group’s work.

The lead has a few buzzwords that could be changed to be more neutral. For example, “providing food for hungry people while striving to end hunger” & “distributed more than 70 million pounds of nonperishable food and fresh produce…” My advice would be to change the bolded words to something more neutral.

(History section) The first sentence is nearing run-on territory. I would consider making it either more concise or splitting it into two. I would work on adding more recent information as well. As far as I am aware, this organization is still very active and there isn’t any information in the history section past the year 2001. The second sentence of the final paragraph has an unneeded comma. “Community Kitchens, a free, 12-week culinary training…”

(Programs section) I really like this section overall but as a reader I am not sure what separates a program from a mobile program to other programs.

(Pantry University Section) The last sentence seems very out of place.

Hherra2 (talk) 01:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

More Review

Overall, I like the structure that the article is written in. The information on here is well-detailed and shows what GCFD does.

One of my main concerns is some of the wording. As previously mentioned some words like "striving" and also 'tackled" in the Kids Cafe section are a bit wordy. Consider using words that are neutral but still give the same effect and factual information you are trying to write about. Also, consider moving the sections accordingly. The article talks about mobile programs and other programs. Rearranging the sections so that "Education and Training" come before the "Mobile programs". This helps to keep everything in order. The same would go for the "Hunger Walk" section, or if possible combining the Hunger Walk section with something else to reduce the number of headings there are. All the partnerships listed in the article are within the last 2-3 years which leaves a bit of a void between the creation of the GFCD up until the last 2-3 years.

Nonetheless, the article details out what GCFD is and what they do. Covfefe22 (talk) 05:14, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

There a few concerns I have regarding this article. The first is on the references. There is a lack of references in the history section, the mobility pantry and food rescue sections, and the pantry university section. I'm not saying their aren't enough, I just think they could be distributed better because it is unclear where the information is coming from. It makes me wonder if that could present a problem. Moreover, the use of the resources seem to be used from a biased standpoint, I recommend using some sources that have a neutral perspective. The basic structure and organization seem good but they need some work. There are a great number of section headings, I don't think they are all necessary. I recommend combining sections. most of the lead is good but I feel that the information at the end could perhaps go in another section (history, for example). I also think that some sentences (in the lead mostly)could be structured better. The article is, overall, well organized.

Peer Review

Your article is well written, it is clear and concise. The article does cover the main aspects of the topic with references to help verify the information. The history section could use some verification. Citations may also help your information become more credible. citations may help the history, mobility pantry and food rescue sections become more verifiable. The structure and organization are good but there are a lot of sub headings that don't seem necessary, also the sub headings need a bit more citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsalaz6 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

I like that you included sections on their conference, youth board, etc. These are interesting details that drew people into the topic. You have a lot of solid information to build on here and I would mainly focus on editing and rewording a lot of what you have before focusing on adding additional content. Your lead paragraph for example, has two run on sentences that can be broken down into shorter sentences. The second sentence lacks a necessary citation, and the last sentence say that “the Alzheimer’s associasion Tin the largest non-profit funder of Alzheimers disease research.” - the largest funder in what context? The larger in Chicago, in the US, in the world? Clarity is important. I also agree with earlier comments about the different paragraph headings for each event being confusing. I would play around with formatting and maybe try to do some bulleted list or something. Try to look at other pages’ examples and build of their formatting.

Overall I think that was frail neutral content, but some it might be worded a bit generously and there are at least 3+ citations that can be added. It might also be nice to include more information on the work/programs/impact of the organization. There seems to be a lot about fundraising success, but what type of impact does the organization actually have in regard to the people they serve. Asmyse2 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)