User talk:BHines10/sandbox

Rachel's Peer Review
# First, what does the article do well? The article does a good job at explaining face negotiation theory and the different components. I also liked the image use at the beginning. There is also a clear organization of heading and subheadings making the content easy to find and process. The citations and references are placed in the right places and are all linking correctly.

# Is there anything from your review that impressed you? The components section, while long and detailed it is the most interesting part of the article as it breaks down the theory. However, because it is so lengthy in words maybe adding an image or graphic here would help break it up.

# Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? The assumptions section of the article gave a better framework of the theory.

# What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? There are a few past and present tones that need to be corrected. In the background section I would introduce who Brown and Levinson are first rather than a few sentences down, because I was wondering who they were when the names were first said. Also, maybe add a picture of Stella Ting-Toomey.

# Why would those changes be an improvement? It would improve general flow of the article and ease of read.

# What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Add a few more images and keep the even coverage and organization of the article by not overly adding complex or wordy sections of information that is not needed.

# Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? My article, forgiveness, can benefit from face negotiation theory in the mindfulness section and the intent to apologize, especially the individualistic and collectivist cultures.

Rdblakely (talk) 19:22, 2 March 2019 (UTC)