User talk:AnnabelGV/sandbox

Professor Feedback: Hello Annabel, I just finished reviewing your work in your sandbox. Good job identifying portions of the article that are in need of proper bibliographic references. I am wondering (out of the many issues you identified) which 1-2 will you focus on to complete your assignment? Do you anticipate sticking with making changes and adding citations or are you planning to write or add to a paragraph? Good start, you have done an impressive job of keeping up with the pace of the assignment! --2605:E000:121B:C40F:5B4:DE47:BDD1:969A (talk) 00:39, 31 March 2019 (UTC)Professor Bensonsmith

Peer Review: Caroline C. <> Annabel GV.
I reviewed Annabel’s edits to the Wiki Page “Maternity Leave in the United States” under the below criteria, which were given in the Wiki Training of Week 8. I separated my comments into Positive Feedback (a) and Critique(b). Annabel didn’t edit one section specifically, and focused on updating and adding sources to various sections such as the lead section, “History”, and “Impact” sections. She also expanded upon the “Social Effects” section. A lead section that is easy to understand A clear structure Balanced coverage Neutral content Reliable sources Overall, I think you’ve done a fantastic job at providing neutral additions with reliable sources. I agree that the title “Depression” should be renamed to something more tasteful such as “Maternal Mental Health.” I think that the addition of some opposing views on Maternity Leave might add to the article, even if most people disagree with these views. Great job! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchou19 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Positive Feedback: When reading through the lead section, I feel comfortable in stating what the topic is and why it is important. Even though the lead section is quite short, nothing is redundant and it reflected the most important information. Annabel’s addition of fact “This is below the 16-week minimum recommended by WHO” seems helpful to explaining the topic.
 * Critique: I would suggest linking the “WHO” to its wiki page, if this exists. I also would suggest adding another couple sentences to the lead section, as it is very short
 * There is clear structure in this article, especially with the additions made to the impacts section. Annabel is correct in the decision to add to “Social Effects”, as it currently lacks content.
 * Although additions were made to the “Access Equality” sub-section, should there perhaps be another sub-section within “Social Effects”? Perhaps the “Social Stigma” surrounding taking Maternity leave in the workplace?
 * I thought the addition to and inclusion of the Paternity leave section was helpful and offered another perspective on the idea of parental leave. Although the Wiki page is Titled “Maternity Leave in the United States”, it offered a new voice and point of view
 * I find that most of the impacts listed are largely “for” maternity leave and there are few negative impacts listed. Balanced coverage includes the opposing side, so perhaps adding in a section geared towards working moms, or expected women’s roles and how having maternity leave contributes to the stereotypical female roles in the U.S.? I have no sources for this, so I’m not sure such negative repercussions exist.
 * Annabel has done a very good job in making her additions to the article as neutral as possible. As I read through each additions, all are purely factual and directly sourced. KUDOS.
 * No Critique
 * All of Annabel’s sources are reliable and can are perfect examples of scholarly articles. I especially enjoy that every addition Annabel has made has a citation that goes with it.
 * No critique