Talk:Susan Griffin

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): Ccnorton29.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2018 and 20 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ksantosouza, Sdiaz116582. Peer reviewers: Ksantosouza.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
Compared to other articles on living persons this one looks skimpy: just a short summary para. and then list of her books and ext linksFelix Folio Secundus (talk) 23:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Tana's Peer Review for Caroline
I think your article is really good and I was really impressed with the amount of information you found and how well everything is organized!

Lead Section: You did a great job of including an introductory sentence that summarizes the article and orients readers to what the article will be about.

Organization: I think the organization is great and the subtitles you have make everything very clear and easy to read.

Citations: You did a great job with your citations and I didn't find anything to change!

Great job! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanamoody (talk • contribs) 22:51, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Shakeitha's Peer Review
The introductory sentence does state the topic of the article concisely and accurately in a single sentence. There is no issues knowing what the article is about. The lead section does break the article into the different sections and summarizes the major points of the. I don't see anything missing. There are efficient headings and subheadings that allow reading the article to be easier. The reader will know what each section is about and can easily go to that specific section based on subheadings and organization. Adding information about her work and her part in ecofeminism is really good. It seems as though you found some really good information on her and are still trying to get more detail about certain aspects of her life that are not exactly easy to find. Adding small information about her life is relevant to the article. There does not seem to be a lot of information on her life in general. I think more information of the summary portion of the article the life section would make the article seem a bit more balanced. There seems to be a lot of information on her awards and a bit more on her work, so editing those sections would make the article seem a bit more balanced. I think the article sounds more like that of an encyclopedia and not like an argument. There does not seem to be a lot of opinions, just facts about the person's life. Not every single statement is associated with a reference, but majority of the sentences do have a reference. The sentence after her anti-pornography novel does not have a reference. The sources are the best ones for the topic and seem to be appropriate for the genre. The references do include completely filled out citation templates. ShakeithaG (talk) 17:57, 19 April 2018 (UTC)