User talk:Baileybane/sandbox

Megan's Evaluation: In your background section, I would be careful using “thoughtfully” as it introduces opinion. Besides that, I think you’ve crafted a well-written background, just in need of some citations for the final few sentences. I think your summary is great. In the first sentence of your analysis, you’re just missing an “a” before tool. The third sentence should say “difficulty of assignments” and the fourth sentence needs a “the” before concept. The content of your analysis is good, but there isn’t a citation for every sentence, so I would try to fix that. Overall, I think your additions so far are very well done and wonderfully written. I see you’re waiting on a few ILL books, so I’m sure then your reception portion will be able to be developed. I definitely understand having a lack of a particular source. Megan rose28 (talk) 23:12, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

I liked your additions a lot. The flow of your writing and your language is very well-done. I had no problems reading your contributions to the "background," "summary," and "analysis" sub-sections. Megan covered most of the grammatical problems, but other than that you are looking very good in terms of where you are at. The citations you have done are excellent, and I can only assume you will be making additional citations before your final draft (as you are waiting on some additional resources). Can't wait to see the finished product! JaimeWalton (talk —Preceding undated comment added 17:24, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Response to Peer Feedback
I did not receive any feedback on the article's talk page, but my peer reviewers left some great advice and revision suggestions. Megan pointed out that the use of my word "thoughtfully" introduces an opinion, which was very helpful. I will make sure to revise my new content additions carefully before going live to ensure that my word choice and diction do not carry any implicit bias. Similarly, I often have difficultly identifying grammatical errors, specifically missing words, in my own writing. My peer reviews helped me identify some of those for correction. When revising the new content, I will be cognizant of that; reading my additions aloud prior to going live may be a good technique to identify these small errors. The most significant feedback my peer reviewers identified was the lack of citations on some sentences in my new content additions. While drafting, I noted in a Google Doc the source in which each sentence of new content derives from, so when revising, I will be sure to add those in. Since the time of the first draft, I've found more sources, particularly for the reception section, that I plan on adding in. Baileybane (talk) 18:22, 3 December 2019 (UTC)