Talk:Anne Mozley

General comments
Hello, Sjensen!

I'm an online ambassador for your WMST 250: Women, Art, and Culture (2014 Q3) class and have just stopped by to provide a quick review and add what I hope will be helpful comments.

You've got a great start to your article about Anne Mozley, particularly by developing a great list of sources for the article. I've got a couple of comments to help make this ready to be an article and to complete your assignment.


 * Regarding sections for the article, you may want to look at User:Apdame/sandbox for basic sections including the introduction or lede, which has a summary of the article and occurs before any of the sections. Another example, just to get a feel for encyclopedic tone and the type of content is Anne Moncure Crane.
 * It would be great to see more specific information about: what she's written and any education or influences she may have had.

I made a couple of minor edits as examples of encyclopedic tone, use of wikilinks, and addition of specific details. By the way, I couldn't find an image of Anne Mozley easily, either, but you may be able to add an image of one of her books, like this or this under PD-simple.

I'll check in on you again, and I'll be watching this page if you have any questions or comments.-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 03:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Im helping too and per chance I live near Derby. Victuallers (talk) 18:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Many of your sentences begin with the same word. For example three of the sentences in a row begin with the word "she". I would suggest changing that around to make the sentences flow better together. Amsinger (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

You may want to put the last paragraph under Major Works under it's own heading since it isn't really about her major works but instead about some of her beliefs/arguments. Amsinger (talk) 19:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


 * hmmm do feel free to fix it, your last edit was great. Victuallers (talk) 20:09, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Edits
I fixed some grammatical and spelling errors in your article but very good over all. Jo v 123 (talk) 00:23, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

There was some inconsistency spelling and grammar, punctuation, and sentence fluency. I also added some more important Wiki links. Great job overall. Agilmer1 (talk) 04:41, 26 November 2014 (UTC)