User talk:Abbey298/sandbox

Hello, Abbey298. I have looked over what you have written in your sandbox regarding the changes you plan to make to the A Game at Chess article, and here is my input.

I believe that the section as a whole can stand well on its own. All of the relevant information regarding each act of the play clearly explains everything one would need to know about that section of the play without overwhelming the reader with information. However, I would suggest possibly combining "Prologue" and "Introduction" sections of the play. I understand if you want to maintain a consistent style, but the information under "Prologue" is too short to warrant its own section.

I also believe that you did a good job with the structure. You list what happens within each act instead of each scene so that the subplots that develop throughout the play do not get broken up too much. Again, though, I would suggest combining the "Prologue" and "Introductions" sections because the "Prologue" sections is simply too short.

I do not have much to say about the balance or neutrality of your edits thus far other than that you have also done a good job at avoiding possible mistakes. You do not try to draw a conclusion nor do you put too much information into any one of the act descriptions at the expense of the other act descriptions. Likewise, your tone suggests that you are unbiased and that neither you nor anyone else may have an opinion about the content of your planned edits.

As for your sources, there is not much to say about this because the nature of what you are editing does not require you to have sources since you are paraphrasing the play itself.

In short, it looks like you have done good work so far. My only other suggestion other than what I mentioned earlier is to meet with your group in order to double-check that these synopses are accurate.