User talk:Ajcutler/sandbox

Article Evaluation: Turkish Red Crescent

Sources:

Last paragraph had said "Certain reports". What reports? What is the source?

In the resource section there is a source stated multiple times. Should only be stated once? Leads to the same place.

Number 17 in resources is not working on my computer.

All citations work.

The newest source was in 2016, look for new, more up-to-date sources

Writing:

"Skepticism Surrounding Qatar Charity" was a little off topic but would be okay if it was tied back into Turkey Red Crescent

"the Turkish Red Crescent has recently begun to partner with ..." How recently? Is it still recent? Find the date.

Article is neutral

More can be added on throughout either article.

Ajcutler (talk) 23:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Mykala's Peer Review
The intro to your article is strong in that is clear and easy to understand. However, it is short and does not give a good indication as to what the Turkish Red Crescent actually is/does. You should consider adding more detail to this section to give readers a better understanding of the purpose and goals of the Turkish Red Crescent. Also, adding where the Turkish Red Cross is present/active would be helpful too. You should create more links to other Wikipedia articles. Terms that appear for the first time in the lead section, such as "Turkey," and "Muslim" (both of which appear in the first and second sentence respectively) can be linked.

The structure of your article is logical and flows in a natural way. Good work! Instead of using bullet points, however, you expand on some of the information you have listed under "activities," as some are quite brief and do not have any explanation (See international aid). Also, given that the Turkish Red Crescent has been involved in helping Syrian refugees, it might be a good idea to create an entire section on this, as the Syrian refugee crisis is very topical and it could drive more traffic to your page. Finally, there is a typo in the second sentence under the section Global Gathering.

The majority of your references come from the same source,(www.kizilay.org.tr) and it is a source that does not return a proper website. This seriously undermines the hard work that you put into writing your article. Try and find information from other, reputable sources. There are also some facts which you state that do not have a citation. For example, under the Partnership with Qatar section, you note that the Turkish Red Crescent made a $10 million dollar deal but do not give any reference as evidence.

Maw774 (talk) 20:35, 1 March 2018 (UTC)Mykala Way

Alyssa's Reply
Thank you so much for your feedback. It was very helpful and greatly needed because I did miss a few things. I completely overlooked the spelling error, thank you for bringing it to my attention. Adding in the links to "Turkey" and "Muslim" was a great idea! I think it added a lot to my article.

A couple things I was confused on was not having the citation for the $10 million dollar deal the Turkish Red Crescent had done because after the sentence there is a link to the article. Also, the links that are from 5 - 10 in references are simply in Turkish and once you click English then reopen it it appears. I am unsure how to make the link go automatically into English. Any input would be greatly appreciated!

Again, thank you for all your suggestions. They are very helpful to me and helped improved the article a lot.

Ajcutler (talk) 19:13, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Kristen's Peer Review
The paragraph starting with “The organization…” at the beginning could be broken down. Maybe using a period after the Crimean War. Then continuing your paragraph with a sen tence that includes what you already have written. Similarly, the Russo-Turkish war paragraph could be broken into more sentences as opposed to long sentences. Some of the last paragraphs seemed off topic.

After reading this, I’m still unclear on the topic, with paragraphs being linked to different things. Furthermore, with your bullet points, I think it would be helpful for you to expand on your points. As mentioned in the other peer review, looking for other sources outside of that website would be a great help! Overall, I think your topic is quite interesting and your research is important for understanding a part of Turkey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KristenKeating1 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Alyssa's Reply
Thank you so much for your feedback! I have looked over everything you had said and made some changes to my work. It was all very good pointers that I greatly appreciated. I have updated the with new changes and if you come across anything you think I should change or take another look at, please let me know because your feedback was very helpful for me.

Ajcutler (talk) 13:27, 29 March 2018 (UTC)