User:EmptyGallonofMilk/Rotten Tomatoes/SeaCalChiSperky Peer Review

NOTE FROM COURSE INSTRUCTOR: I agree with the points Connor raises here. Some of these sections need to be re-written and paraphrased rather than "straight copied" and it would be good to have a few more mainstream publication sources to back some of this info up. In general, I'm also having a hard time discerning which parts of the sandbox draft are meant to be the future article and which are just quotes from other sources that have yet to be integrated via paraphrase. Post 2021 history would also be good.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

EmptyGallonofMilk


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EmptyGallonofMilk/Rotten_Tomatoes?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Rotten Tomatoes

Evaluate the drafted changes
Content:

Your first paragraph, i know is straight from the real page and you are just adding a source, but i feel like it needs to be re-written. because if looks like it was just straight copied and pasted right from the cite source.

Adding history past 2021 would add to the site just make sure you have a few sources.

Sources:

I don't think the website fandom can be used as a reliable site, due to it looking like a wikipedia page, and is also run by fans. its not like a true news site.

The scribd might be questionable as well, I don't have much knowledge with it but it might need a deeper look at.

One thing i noticed was that your cite for the paragraph about the "Golden Oyster Awards", https://globalny.biz/catalog/id/1606 : I don't think this is a good source, because it looks to me as a straight copy of the wikipedia page for rotten tomatoes just on that website.