User talk:Bdivito10/sandbox


 * 1) First of all, there was a ton of information and I did genuinely feel like I learned a lot. You guys also had a lot of different sources to support each sentence and I liked the variety. The spacing of the Events section made it easier to read.
 * 2) The Chicago section had a few run on sentences that disrupted the flow of the section. It made the section feel bulky and sometimes hard to follow along. Some minor grammatical errors in both sections as well but those should be easy to fix. As for editing down the clunky feeling of "Chicago" I would suggest condensing the sentence or maybe adding a paragraph break.
 * 3) The most important thing you guys can do is condensing the sentences so that it is easier to read. There is a bulk of information that I think if better formatted -via sentence structure-the reader will be able to follow along easier.
 * 4) I was really impressed with your groups references. I think we would benefit from diversifying our sources for our own article.

Ssasad4 (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2019 (UTC) Ssasad4 (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review
1. Overall, the article has a lot of useful information that is backed up by reliable sources. The infobox was impressive and I liked that it included the organization's focus as it created a nice little overview of the article.

2. I would suggest breaking up the Chicago section into a small "history" section and an "initiatives" section. The Chicago section feels a bit cluttered. Also, I would edit the citations as many of the references listed in the bottom of the article are repeated (references 1, 2, and 6).

3. The most important thing the authors could do to improve their article is to fix their sentence structure and some grammar. It would make reading it much easier. There is one sentence in the middle of the Chicago section ("Cradles to Crayons wants it to be known that basic life necessities should not be an issue for anyone to obtain") that would be used best if it were in the beginning of the section. Also I feel like the name of the organization is used in every sentence or every other sentence and it makes the article sound weird. Try finding other ways to discuss the organization without actually naming it. You know how when you say a word too many times it starts to sound like a fake word? That's what I was feeling every time I read Cradles to Crayons. We did a sentence review in which we looked at each sentence and tried to make it "sound" and flow better. This would be useful in making your article flow better, making it easier to read.

4. I think our article could use a more updated sandbox similar to theirs. If we add a "focus" and "locations" section it would make our article easier to read. --MelissaSolis19 (talk) 21:32, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

1. The wiki page is very well written and researched, it is obvious by the 11 different articles used. As the reader, I felt that it was easy to follow and has a generally neutral tone. I enjoyed the ‘Event’ section and felt that it showed how involved Cradles to Crayon is with Chicago communities.

2. To help improve the page I’d say including Cradles to Crayon’s main objective in the give few sentences. In source two I found “Cradles to Crayons®, a nonprofit organization that equips children from birth through age 12 living in homeless or low-income situations with the essential items they need to thrive – at home, at school, and at play, is proud to announce the opening of its Giving Factory warehouse” which would be great to include. I also think that there is a lot of information in the first paragraph that can be broken up. For example; Volunteer responsibility and number of volunteers along with any other information since its the organization is driven on volunteers.

3. The main focus for improvement would be to go through each sentence to ensure it is clear, concise and follow a neural tone. One particular sentence that I found redundant was "Cradles to Crayons is aware that children with lower incomes do not always have basic necessities in life and that is no different in Chicago". It was said earlier in the text and doesn't really need to be repeated. I did enjoy the 'Focus' section it helped to sum up the main purpose of the organization. By adding these changes it will make the page more organized and easier to read.

4. This article really allowed me to think about similar improvements for my group's page. To double-check that there is a natural flow and that it is easy to understand. We don't have a lot in our MoS and further elaborate on our organization it would be beneficial to add a focus section and location(s). Additionally, I've made some changes to the first article. I added the sentence "Many volunteers within the Chicago community welcomed Cradles to Crayons in hopes of getting 16,000 children above the age of 12 off the streets and into a better living situation. Many basic living essentials are donated and are put through a screening process" and edited a few spelling/grammar errors

SofiaNajera4 (talk) 01:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review by jazzalejandro
Jazzalejandro (talk) 03:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) The article is really informative for the Chicago location. I found a lot of the information kind of interesting. The events section is pretty clear and straightforward, which is always good when editing on wikipedia. I think your group did a good job of not "sounding like an ad."
 * 2) I really wish you would add a bit more about the "behind the scenes" event if you can. I suggest you use "Cradles to Crayons" less and switch it up with phrases like "the organization," "the non-profit," or maybe even "CtC" would be useful too. A couple of things to fix up would be merging reference 7 and 13 because they are the same link. I would also word the event from August 2018 differently from June 2019 since that are from 2 entirely different dates.
 * 3) The most important thing you can work on is to focus on rewording individual sentences. I get what you are trying to convey, but some sentences are worded a little awkwardly. For instance, the second sentence of the article can be broken into 2 sentences and the first sentence under "Events."
 * 4) Something I noticed your group did that mine could add is adding hyperlinks to words like Chicago in our article. Your group did a good job of that and adding that could really enhance our article.