User talk:Anon notmax/sandbox

Peer Review
Dante2018 (talk) 19:37, 18 November 2018 (UTC)Hey! I really like how organized and clear your page is, I would love to reorganize my sandbox a little more like yours, it's very easy to follow. I noticed that your plan was to add more statistics and divide the section into US and Canadian initiatives, however, I didn't see the division in your sandbox. I would like to see how you will divide the section into two parts as you plan. I also noticed that you only have 5 sources, they seem to be appropriate sources and reliable, however, I did not see you adding them into your sandbox in the article. I would like to see your sandbox when you complete adding all the information that you originally planned.

Kaylee Hawkins' Peer Review
Hello Ana-Maria,

Firstly, I would just like to say that I appreciate all of the effort that you have put into your article, and I wish you the best of luck on your presentation tomorrow! I will be conducting this peer review section by section according to the rubric we were given several weeks ago. I hope that helps you to follow my peer review in a clear and simple way!

Lead Section: In your opening sentence, you stated what the 2018 Women's March was, but you did not include a reason for their march. I would consider possibly adding a few words describing the objective of those who gathered to march. You obviously write about the objective further down in your lead paragraph, but as the opening statement is meant to be a one sentence summary of your article, I think it would be helpful to add a short bit in such as "gathered to march for women's rights." The sentence which follows your fourth citation is a bit clunky, if you switch a few words around, I think it might flow more easily. In reference to the fact that your lead section was not upholding neutrality, I do think that it is neutral as you are writing about someone else's experience and quoting them. That being said, your lead section at the moment is reading a bit more like an article on Halsey than an article on the 2018 March itself. I would consider cutting down the information on her personally, and focus on a plethora of celebrities who marched in 2018, and perhaps create a section about celebrities and sexual assault advocacy.

Article: That being said, I noticed that you added this information to your "About" section, rather than keeping it in the original articles, "Sexual Advocacy Section". I would consider whether or not this is a positive change, as any information that is presented in the lead section should also be present in the article. I also noticed that the original article included a section on the pink pussy hats. Did you feel that this section did not need to be edited, or have you decided to remove it all together? If this section of the article is staying, it would be important to add a sentence about the hats in the lead paragraph as ALL topics mentioned in the article, should also be mentioned in the lead paragraph. The sections on the marches in the different cities around the world look good to me!

Citations: Most sentences have a citation attached to them, but keep in mind that EVERY statement, including those in your lead section need to have a citation associated with them. I recognize that this may be somewhat difficult, as this march occurred within this year, and therefore, there is probably not much literature on this topic thus far. I noticed that you included some sources that were not scholarly, such as People Magazine, but for this topic, it is most likely appropriate. I would double check with Dr. Smith just to be sure, though. Be proud that you scrounged up 14 sources for such a current topic!

Overall: I really enjoyed your article, I hope you've had fun writing on this interesting topic! If you have any questions concerning my peer review, please don't hesitate to email me. I'd be more than happy to clarify any of my suggestions. Also, all of these things are suggestions, so if you feel as though I've torn apart your article so close to the deadline, don't be overwhelmed! You truly do have a lovely article here, and my opinion is but one!

Leeplu (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2018 (UTC)kayleehawkins/leeplu