User:Whittlez/sandbox

Larissa FastHorse - Naomi Worob’s Peer Review
It looks like you haven't put your edits in yet, so I didn't want to say too much about the current state of the article as I am sure you are working on ironing out some of the kinks! Overall, it seems like there are good ideas, but the sentence structure and organization is rough. The citations look reliable, but there aren't that many. In addition, the way that they are placed in the article makes it difficult to read. I'm looking forward to reading what you do!


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

The flow of this article makes it difficult to get through in some parts. From the pages history it looks like you haven't edited yet, so I would just pay attention to sentence structure and make sure that you adhere to one idea / sentence. For example, in the introduction it was confusing whether Larissa began as a dancer and then became a choreographer, or did both at the same time. When she retired from her ballet career did she continue choreographing?


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?


 * Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

The way that citations are placed in a sentence (i.e. multiple citations in a single sentence) makes the article difficult to read. I wonder if all these citations are necessary, or if some could be combined and edited out.


 * Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?


 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?

Larissa FastHorse - Elena's Peer Review
Hi Zoe-- looks great, just make sure to cite all your sources and add more to the biography if possible.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added