User talk:Andrewswhitman/sandbox

Peer Review
It's difficult to tell which section is the lead at the moment. I'd say the first two or three sentences would work well as the lead. I cannot comment on the article structure at this time, because it's a single paragraph. The tone is neutral. Honestly, there's not much content about the actual convention in this article at present. I can't comment on the sources because only one has actually been cited, and it's the convention minutes. That source is reliable. I would suggest rewriting the last sentence, either with semicolons in the list or by moving the titles in front of the names. --Waysu94 (talk) 21:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

LaChapelle Peer Review:
Your first two sentences could probably be combined together into a lead of sorts. I can't really comment on the form, as there's only the single paragraph of content. Your source is definitely reliable, but a few more would probably be useful. Lachapek (talk) 01:38, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Prof. Smith comments on first draft of Wikipedia article
Hi Andrew,

This first draft doesn't meet most of the requirements for the article, so I can't really comment much on it. I would make sure to split out a couple of sentences so that you have a proper lead. Then make sure that you split up the content among at least two headings and include all of the other important material such as the See Also section, References, and External links. You'll want to be sure and do more research and add more content to this article to succeed on the final draft.StaceySmithOSU (talk) 00:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)