Talk:Murder of Angie Dodge

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Murder of Angie Dodge 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 1095 days

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Idaho Low‑importance 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. This article is supported by WikiProject Idaho (assessed as Low-importance).

I hope you are feeling better! What does the article (or section) do well? This is a really good outline. I think you have hit all the points that you want to make really well. The lead is well thought out and gives a good summary of what the rest of the paper is going to be.

What changes would you suggest overall? Within the lead section, I think you should define familial searching after the first time you mention it. That way readers will understand the term when it comes up later in your article. I also think it is good to have an understanding of what the terminology means in order to understand why this case study is significant. Also, if you are going to have a section on Michael Usry JR. you should mention him in your lead so the section does not come out of anywhere. If you are going to have specific sections on Michael Usry Jr and Brian Leigh Dripps Sr. I would also have a distinct section on Chris Tapp. That way you can explore Chris Tapp’s story out of the confines of the initial investigation. His freedom through the innocence project is not related to the initial investigation. Within that section, you can also explore what wrongful convictions are just as you explore familial searching. Because this is an article on the Annie Dodge case and not familial searching (I think at least!) I am not sure if you need to go super deep into the topic. Familial searching and its controversy, impact and other cases could be a Wikipedia article all on its own. I also think you should flush out the impact section a little bit more. Is the impact section going to focus on policy or social norms? Is it going to focus on familial searching and/or wrongful convictions?

What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution? You have a great outline, I think you just need to start adding more details and information! I also think figuring out a focus for your Wikipedia page will help you whittle down information. Are you looking at the Annie Dodge case as a case study for familial searching? Is it a case for wrongful convictions? Are you looking at the case historically and holistically? Once you pick a path, I think the rest will flow pretty seamlessly.

Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own? If so, let him/her know! I think the impact section is a really good idea. It shows why the case was significant and how it has had lasting effects on society or policy. I want to expand one of my sections to include societal impact.

Tglickman (talk) 18:30, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]