User talk:BethanyJJohnson/sandbox2

05/13/2019 Evaluation by Joshua Gramley
Hey, Bethany! What a lovely contribution to this page.

Spelling/Grammar nearly meets expectations. Some quick potential revisions to consider: 1. In American English, I believe commas typically go inside quotation marks...so phrases like "fifth season" in the Starkbierfest entry might benefit from a little comma-herding :) 2. Fruhlingsfest: seasons needn't be capitalized, so you may want to change (demote?) "Spring" to "spring" here.

Language nearly meets expectations. Good encyclopedic tone throughout! One quick suggestion: 1. Auer Dult: phrasing is a little ambiguous here in sentence one; I feel pretty certain I know what you're going for, but I think it would be easy to read this sentence as suggesting that those rides for children are also for sale. Third sentence feels a little awkward, too; lack of subject makes it fragmentary.

Organization meets expectations. I really like what you've done here in organizing the festival names, dates and locations as smaller headings. I wonder if it wouldn't prove a bit easier to read if you bolded the entire text in the heading, and/or italicized the non-bolded section. Have you tried either of those formatting styles? Also, I wonder how those headings might look with a period at the end. To me, that might look a shade better. All of this is ultimately style choices, though, so do what you think works best, of course!

Coding nearly meets expectations. Citation in sentence 3 (ends with "Munich") should come after period, rather than before. Also, I'm not sure you need to cite in your festival headings.

Validity meets expectations. All of the information seems true, useful, and phrased in uncontroversial ways.

Completion exceeds expectations. Obviously, you went above and beyond for this one! Nice work.

Relevance meets expectations. Nothing superfluous here. Lots of really good insight into culture. I especially like the history of Kocherlball, and the extra detail on Tollwood.

Citations meets expectations--very thorough.

Sources nearly meets expectations--looks like you need one more.

References meets expectations.

Again, really nice work here! The Munich page will improve with your contribution.

05/13/2019 Evaluation by WavesOfAmur

 * Points: 37/40
 * Grade: 93%

Looks pretty good, perhaps the detail threw me off a little, but only because it looks more of a list than a potential addition into a category. Nevertheless, it looks great! The research is phenomenal, and the sources are sound. Here's what I think:

Spelling/Grammar meets expectations - good, but some hiccups: "The Auer Dult markets are the largest markets of their kind in Europe. And takes place over 9 days each, three times a year." Might want to replace the "And" at the beginning of the second sentence with a different word. Perhaps "These", to complement the plural "markets" in the former sentence?

Language exceeds expectations - excellent use of language

Organization meets expectations - it's organized so far as lists might go, but perhaps not necessarily what would be ideal in an actual article.

Coding meets expectations - Probably fine, still unsure how to grade this properly.

Validity exceeds expectations - looks perfect in this regard, as well as consistent

Completion meets expectations - missing one source, and the overall formatting of the page doesn't seem complete. Perhaps structure it as if it were actually on the real article?

Relevance meets expectations - Seems relevant as a form of culture, which is one of the categories.

Citations meets expectations - good sources, appreciate some of the more direct sources that talk about exactly what the festivals are.

References meets expectations - need 1 more, but otherwise great

05/16/2019 Evaluations by Escheit2
Spelling/Grammar is strong, although I did notice a slight mistake with the capitalization of spring. Other than that, it looks very good.

Language is very good. You sound mature and straight to the point without using a different tone. No persuasiveness too so that's a plus.

Organization meets expectations. I like the way you organized this, its very well organized in general and love the time period on the right. Gives the reader even more information while reading.

Coding meets expectations. Im definitely not good with coding, but it looks good to me!

Validity meets expectations. From what I read, and your citations, it looks true and the tone of the overall document seems well written. This piece in general helps the validity of your argument.

Completion meets expectations. You did well on it, and its very well organized.

Relevance meets expectations. Everything looks overall very well, and nothing thats not relevant at all is in here. Its all related to the annual festivals in Munich!

Citations meets expectations.

Sources nearly meets expectations- looks good, you have all 10 there!

References meets expectations.

Comments: I do really like everything, but for me personally, I don't like seeing the festivals with the title be hyperlinked. It shows a sense of inconsistencies having some but not all be in blue while others in black. You might want to take them out, and leave them black, but hyperlink the festival somewhere in your paragraph. Everything else seemed very well written and I think you did a good job. I felt like I was constantly saying you were good on each point, but you are literally doing good here!

6/7/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright
DrMichaelWright (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Since I see you posted this on the Munich article proper, I will grade your version of that, rather than the sandbox version on the other side of this page. Good for you for taking up the challenge of adding it to Wikipedia proper. Below are some suggestions for making it even better, though I already addressed a few issues.


 * Points: 38/40
 * Grade: 95%

Spelling/Grammar
Meets standard.
 * "...70% of all Tollwoood events..." That's three o's for the price of one.(fixed)
 * "Olympia Park" should be Olympiapark.

Language
Meets standard.
 * This was fairly encyclopedic, when you could have easily slid into tourist-pamphlet speak. Well done!

Organization
Meets standard.

Coding
Meets standard.
 * You've really done a great job creating all those links within the page. Some, such as linking to slides was a bit overkill, but since there's an article for it, why not?! XD
 * On the Munich page your entry seemed to have caused an error arising from the use of a name ID that was already in use further down on the page. It is good practice to use name IDs that give a good hint about which source they belong with, rather than just a number. I already fixed this issue.
 * In your sandbox draft, I see you had the headers linked, which was done differently on the live version. I take it that that was someone else's revision.
 * I think a more eloquent way still would have been to use main-article templates, such as under those headers, which would have created an even clearer signal that those terms had full pages elsewhere. (I already did the Auer Dult one, but you could do the others.)

Validity
Meets standard.
 * You've created confusion between Kaltenberg and Kaltenburg. Kaltenburg Castle, which you linked to is a ruin in Baden-Württemberg, which is an hour and a half's drive from Munich (as the Google drives, anyway). The Kaltenberg Knights tournament is held in Geltendorf, which is still nearly an hour's drive from Munich. There is also a town of Kaltenberg in Austria.

Completion
Meets standard. You've produced a worthwhile amount of text.

Relevance
Meets standard.
 * Overall, this is a worthwhile part of the Munich page, even if it is somewhat unacademic.
 * The Kaltenberg Knights Tournament is a dubious inclusion, given that it is held more than 50km west of the city. I think this is a case where you allowed Zimmermann & Kummerow's zeal for selling Munich to override a reasonable sense of boundary. I'd remove this from the page if I were you.
 * UPDATE: It seems an other editor, Nillurcheier, already caught that and deleted it.