Talk:Protect Our Winters

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Climate change Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Environment Low‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Colorado 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Colorado portal This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado, our collaboration to improve, create, and update Wikipedia articles about the U.S. State of Colorado. To comment about this article, select the New section tab above. For questions about, or to make suggestions for Colorado articles, go to our project's talk page. We invite you to join us!

Skiing and Snowboarding Low‑importance

	Sports portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skiing and Snowboarding, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of skiing and snowboarding articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Skiing and SnowboardingWikipedia:WikiProject Skiing and SnowboardingTemplate:WikiProject Skiing and SnowboardingSkiing and Snowboarding articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

Just adding some bulk under each heading slowly and documenting it on the talk page as to use it like Rosie suggested. Yaye, wee, fun! Lazershea (talk) 20:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just did some editing and I was going to add some links beside specific points but I think we should do links and citations last when everything is put together. Lazershea (talk) 20:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know the logo in the infobox is greenpeace, I am not sure if we are allowed to take the POW logo from their website. Also the contents and title box is strange I'm not sure how to sort that out. Also I did add some citations just to figure out how it works aaahhhh. Lazershea (talk) 22:01, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arik here, the edit at 22:52, 10 April 2015‎ by 128.189.76.182 was actually me, I forgot to log in, sorry! Attt7 (talk) 23:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2019 and 1 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Birkssachdev, BSII0IX. Peer reviewers: Siddkumaran.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good work so far![edit]

Peer review by Peter Lambert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lazershea/sandbox

Initial Overview:

-Looks well organized

-Table could be slightly higher

-Could use some pictures?

Introduction:

-Succinct

-Any project or event they’re particularly known for?

-Does this fit under the banner of any larger Wikipedia project on, say, environmental organizations?

Members and support:

-this is good.

-I’d like to know more about what they do before I hear who supports them

Activism:

-well supported section, great info and references.

-Im finding that a lot of the introductory/general sentances describing their work are somewhat dense – its not easy to glance at the page and figure out what they do, or describe it to someone else in one easy sentence

Programs

-Ah! Here it is. This just needs to be higher, and given more importance in the introduction

Media

-Looks great, makes me want to watch the films

References

-Looks good. I’m not sure if this is Wikipedia’s standard for formatting references, but we can both learn that.

Final/General:

Sick article! Insightful and succinct.

Starts off a little dense and hard to understand

The programs section is the golden bullet for the above problem – put it nice and high!

See if you can break the introduction into two paragraphs: one that simply describes the organization, and one that includes all the other complicating detail.

--PeteLambert (talk) 19:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Rosie: Rosieredfield (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good advice about the need to simplify the writing.

Review[edit]

Peer Review by Adrian

This is a very good page. Nothing much more to add after recommendations made by User:PeteLambert, a picture of the organization's logo would make this page more complete. Good work !

VariedEye (talk) 09:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox Feedback[edit]

Peer Review by David Ko

Hello Lazershea,

I took a look at your sandbox on POW and overall, it looks pretty good as it is. I do however see room for improvements. The link to Jeremy Jones for example sends the user to a list of suggestions of possible people that have that name. You can actually hyperlink the James Jones you are referring to by using --> [ [ "name of actual page"| "name that shows up in the page" ] ] . Also, adding an image of the emblem of the organization could also be helpful in making the page more lively since there aren't any pictures on your page anyways. It might be a good idea to do so. For the documentaries, a small summary of each film could be added to lengthen up each of those sections as well. That being said, I really like the members and support and activism sections of the page. Everything is referenced well (maybe have a reference at the end of the 2nd paragraph of the Members and Support section?) and all the references work. Overall good job and looking forward to see this page on wiki!

Davidk94 (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Rosie: Rosieredfield (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Film summaries would be very good. Do these films also have their own pages?

Peer Review by Henry You did quite well on your page even if its just a draft with a good load on content. Suggestions for improvement involves the format of your page. The 'Protect Our Winters' section should be at the very top as it should be the title of your page, don't include (POW) in the headings. The 'Content' box should be below the POW description with the 'POW info box' on the very right side of the section of text, then remaining sections of your page should follow afterwards. The link to the website should be listed in a different section call 'External Links' and not in 'References'. Other minor improvements are simply adding in more content if possible and adding some images as well. For any additional information, try to write them in a bit more detail that involves more than using one sentence to make it appear more relevant for the section it belongs to in your page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeh000 (talk • contribs) 07:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Rosie: Rosieredfield (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Geed advice about expanding the single-sentence entries.

Peer Review by Dylan

The page looks good. At the top you may want to add the corporate logo so that people can identify the company. The links on your page should take you to the correct destination that the location in the article suggests. You may want to expand on the programs and initiatives section given the company is a non-profit environmental organization people looking at the page wold be interested in that section. Also for the media section you may want to include some external links to relevant websites for the movies that are there.TheSunDanceKid19 (talk) 05:23, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Rosie: Rosieredfield (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Using the POW logo would be very good. Is permission needed?

Review by Chris[edit]

You should have some general overview content at the beginning before the table of contents. This is what helps captivate readers and give them an overview of the article when they read it. It an also serve as a intro to the article. You can do this by just typing in info without a heading, seems a bit weird at first but if you look at any wiki article this is what the standard format is like. Article is pretty well written and referencing is done fairly well too. Some photos or logos would be something that you can look to add.It would be nice to see the movie poster or something for some of the media content that they have done. Just be careful that in the programs and initiatives section that you aren't just completely regurgitating what is on their website. A better way you could possibly do that section would be to summarize in your own words what is on those pages on their website and add a reference to it so that if readers want to read more or be redirected to the site they can choose to do so after they have read your summary. Right now they have to click on those links to know what you are talking about rather than getting the info from the wiki page. Overall it is a great article and with a few minor changes it should be a good final product! Chrisv21 (talk) 21:27, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Rosie: Rosieredfield (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I like your advice about summarizing content in your own words.

Feedback from Ruth and Rosie[edit]

Ruth's comments on the March 10 version:

The introduction needs to be above the contents and perhaps a little bit more detail in the intro i.e. head office is where, how large is this organization.
What were the outcomes of the activism activates if any?
Events: where did these events take place? USA? Canada? Overall good, but I would like to see a little bit more detail to flesh it out.
Has there been any criticism against POW and/or their movies or events?
A picture or two would help if possible (although I understand it might be difficult with copyright issues)

Rosie's comments:

The introductory paragraph needs to be placed above the Table of Comments (See Chris's advice, or check the formatting of similar pages).
For photos, you could compare photos of a local mountain (e.g. Cypress) in a good winter and this winter!
Can you give more specific information about its function as an organization. How many members are there? Are they individuals or associations? Can anyone join? What does it cost to join? What do members get (newsletter? local meetings? events?)