User talk:Akrame4/New sandbox

Akrame4's Peer Review
Pros:

I like the tone of the section: it doesn't feel argumentative, basically like I'm reading a Wikipedia webpage.

There is neutral content, no strict bias or any form of opinion.

I really like the background section. It gives enough clarity on what's happening in a matter of a couple of sentences. I feel like it's well crafted. (help me with my draft pleasE) Nice citations! You inputted each citation in every factual statement.

Cons:

I think avoid saying the word "lack," considering it somewhat sounds like a term used in argumentative essays. I'd recommend just saying "The digital divide in Mexico" instead of "The lack of access"

I don't know if you're adding this in a later date but, try including age and tying it with education since I'm assuming it goes hand-in-hand. Or age and geography because geography doesn't have enough coverage.

Overall, really good start! Hopefully I helped.

Response to Peer Review
We took the advice of our professor, peer reviewer, and the Wikipedia Editing Policy to make changes to our draft.

Firstly, we made the subheading more descriptive. (i.e. from Background to Reasons for the Divide)

Next, we made links in the article on certain words so that in case if someone was reading our article, and they did not know what something meant, he or she could easily click on the word and receive more information. We assume that everyone understands terms like "broadband," but this may not actually be true. Because of this, we found it necessary to include a few links in the article.

Another thing we did was went back on all our sources and made sure that we properly cited our material in our article. We made sure that we did not plagiarize. We wanted to make sure that we followed Wikipedia's policies. At this same time, we checked for a neutral tone and we believe that our article is neutral.

We decided to remove the few sentences we had on gender because we found that the information was scarce and rather confusing. To make up for this subtraction, we added more sentences on education. Our change has made a big improvement to the article.

Lastly, we rearranged the sentences/sections that we had the first draft in. We wanted to make a more cohesive section. But, like last time, we still have our "lead" section, and then after it, we have our subheading and the rest of our newly arranged draft.

Cpears8 (talk) 19:57, 1 November 2018 (UTC)