User talk:Amberzeise/sandbox

Peer Review: Great content! You all have a solid start. A couple of feedback comments: maybe think about cutting back on some of the less relevant material so that the focus is kept on Isle de Jean Charles, Louisiana. It also might be helpful for the readers, to have a sentence at the end tying everything together in the Donald Trump and Climate Change subtopic. Drgood13 (talk) 17:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)Drgood13

Peer Review
Construction of the article is clear and easy to follow. Nice, interesting contents. Some can be improved: The article relies a little bit too much on two to three sources, such as The Island and the NY time news, I believe it will be better to add more resources to make the article more neutral. The connection between sections could be more closely connected, for now each part is good but seems like separated. Ljqianl (talk) 08:19, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the tips! Good call on the sources, might be better to get some more diverse ideas from other experts to keep it reliable and more interesting. Also are you saying that we should add some transition sentences from the different sections? We'll try to add a little something about each section, or hinting at each section, in the various paragraphs. Also yes good point, cutting might also be good to keep the readers less confused on whats going on. Thanks! --Fbingham7 (talk) 05:25, 14 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Those are helpful! I do think more sources would be good, though there are a limited number of reliable articles. Could you elaborate on what material feels irrelevant to the topic? I can see how they each feel a bit separate. Hopefully when I go though the whole article for consistency and fluidity that will help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amberzeise (talk • contribs) 05:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)