User talk:AliciaM 00/sandbox

1. First, what does the article-draft do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? ADDS ON EXTRA INFO ABOUT FOOD COURTS, THIS IS NEEDED FOR THE READER TO UNDERSTAND BACKGROUND INFO. VERY SURPRISED TO READ ABOUT FOOD COURTS VERY INTERESTING SUBJECT

2. Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic? WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE UPDATED INFO ON FOOD COURTS. LAST ARTICLE IS FROM 10 YEARS AGO. EATING TRENDS HAVE CHANGED

3. Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Explain. Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic. BOTH TALKS ABOUT OVERALL FOOD COURT EXPENSES, GOES INTO DETAIL/HIGHLIGHTS EVOLUTION OF PANDA EXPRESS

4. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? [ *first notorious successful food court business that is widely noted by many other food industry insiders. One of the reasons for Panda Express' success was due to their constant change and upgrading of their menu items.* ] THIS SENTENCE MAY SUGGEST FAVORITISM TOWARDS PANDA EXPRESS? USAGE OF WORD NOTORIOUS AND SUCCESS? NOT SURE IF IT SHOULD BE CHANGED TO DISPLAY MORE NEUTRALITY

5. Are there any changes you would suggest the author apply to the article? Why? SEE #4

6. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! SIMPLICITY OF THE EDIT, PUT NUMBERS IN THERE WHICH IS GOOD FOR VERIFICATION. Vnessvsmars (talk) 01:24, 2 December 2019 (UTC)