User:Aliciab5334/Regina Gwynn/Nicholas Rondan Peer Review

General info
Aliciab5334, Eric godbout24, Hailey720
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Aliciab5334/Regina Gwynn
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
One thing I noticed quite early on is that the article starts off instantly stating what Regina Gwynn's career path has been, instead of introducing us to Regina. It doesn't necessarily say what Regina Gwynnn does or who she is initially, making it difficult to grasp what the article is trying to convey. There are two good paragraphs for the lead and article body, but they do need some reshaping in phrasing as it appears to be trying to convince the reader of Regina's accomplishments rather than stating what they are/were. For example, the sentence "Regina knew she wanted to run her own business like them someday" makes it seem like it is a persuasive sentence, and also makes it look like it comes from an unsourced piece of information. The lack of information of who Regina is in the beginning, is crucial in helping the reader understand her notability.

One thing to note is that there should be citations after every sentence. Even if the entire paragraph is only using one or two citations.

Furthermore, I've noticed there are eight sources in the bibliography but only four have been utilized in the draft. some notes in the lead paragraph can be changed to a Career & Education section while the lead can be summarized as who Regina is and what is she doing. It looks like you have the sources available in the bibliography, but without using them the article has many gaps in information that can be added to better support Regina's influence in her respective area.

The content added in the article body section is well written, but the beginning makes it sound like it is jumping off of the previous section. The previous Lead section ends with Regina's launch of Black Women Talk Tech in 2017, but the next section being the Article body starts off with "Later, in 2014" causing a gap in information and conflicting ideas in both sections. In the lead section, this sentence "The Apparel Group in New York City from 2011-2015", ends with a citation, but there is no end to the actual sentence as it continues with "before meeting Esosa Ighodaro and launching Black Women Talk Tech just two years later in 2017." I noticed there are two used citations in that one sentence, but the first citation is used in the middle, when both citations can be added at the end so you don't split a sentence with a citation before the sentence ends. Also, Even though it is explained who Ighodaro is in the next section, there is no explanation of who this individual is and their importance to Regina's information in the lead section "before meeting Esosa Ighodaro and launching Black Women Talk...". The article body section also states that there are two other individuals that helped found Black Women Talk Tech, Washington and Ighodaro, but only Ighodaro is mentioned in the previous section.

I think a good leading sentence or paragraph of the article can start by explaining Who Regina is, what she founded,and what she is currently doing. This can help with the overall narrative of the article.

One thing I started doing was adding Hyperlinks to certain keywords in the article. Those are the blue links you see in almost every Wikipedia article that lead to other articles. You can do this while editing by highlighting a word, or words and clicking the chain symbol on the left of the big 'A' towards the top of the page. This brings up relevant Wikipedia articles pertaining to what you have highlighted. An example is this sentence here Because of this, her entrepreneurship and business adventure began in North Carolina. North Carolina is a keyword of her entrepreneurship beginnings and it being highlighted can add more depth to understanding Regina.

In conclusion, I think you have the areas and sources to meet the needs of more information, but there is a good amount of persuasive writing in the article. There seems to be a lack of attribution in a few sentences, as well as precision. With some slight editing, additional information, clarity and attribution of specific information, the article can stand out more and provide the necessary details to the importance of Regina Gwynn.