User talk:Bradgaskin98/sandbox

Starting this talk page for Casey to facilitate peer review. Bradgaskin98 (talk) 23:03, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Casey's peer review of Bradley
Hey Bradley I looked over all of your additions and also looked at how they apply to the group sandbox edits. I think what you are adding looks great and I actually really enjoyed reading the information you contributed to the page. As for your two comments on what the edits do well, first they add some really cool information. I had not (for some reason I do not know) considered a purgatory or limbo in regards to the Islamic faith. It makes sense as it exist in the other abrahamic faiths. Nice add. Secondly being as extensive as your article was to begin with, awesome job finding new information to add. You really come across in a neutral way that is applicable to the project and wikipedia as a whole. The information you contribute definitely adds nicely to what already exits. The two ways they could be improved, first I am not sure if the placement on the group sandbox is where you intend to leave your part but it seems like it could be moved to a more approachable place. It seemed like it was just added to the end of what was already there without intergrading it in a more approachable way. Secondly there were two parts that I was a little confused on in The Concept of Eternity section, the 7th line down there is a part that says, "possibly that Allah Allah may yet commute a sentence to Hell" I was unsure of what this meant or if I was missing something. I read it a few times and still did not understand it. If its a quote, no worries but if not, maybe clarify?? As for a preliminary grade based on what I have seen up to this point I would give you an A. You seem to have adequately met all of the necessary requirements in the rubric. Is there more that could be done? Always but I think what you have done looks awesome. Congrats man. I will look again this weekend and see if I see or can think of anything additional but I wanted to ensure that the peer review process was done by the timeline specified. New Section - Your section is new and directly applies to the page. It is interesting and informative. It ties in well with the rest of the page, just maybe consider relocation if your group wants to integrate it a little better. - Excellent Reorganization - it definitely is organized and ties into the direct intent of the article. - Excellent Gaps - It seems to me, with my very little knowledge of Islamic Eschatology that what you have added fills in a large, previously unacknowledged gap. Good content that definitely fill an unfulfilled gap. - Excellent Smaller additions - The smaller additions that you added directly applied to your larger section. It seems like it was inclusive and well thought out. Maybe if any relocation is done, it will provide more content for other large sections too. All in all the sub headings and sub additions work perfectly with you major theme. - Excellent References/Citations - Your references seemed great as far as I could tell. It seems like the content that you derived from them was directly applicable to what the whole page and your personal additions. - Excellent Congrats on how far you've come in this and I did find it useful and fun to read.

p.s. if you have time before class on Tuesday I would love for you to run me through quickly on how you added the chicago style citations. natalie and I were just talking about how there is something that is somehow getting overlooked in how to do this as well as what you have done. Hope you have a great weekend and if i can think of any addition criticism and suggestions, I will let you know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Casey1279 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

JM's Peer Review
Two comments on what your individual changes do well:

Introduction of secondary scholarship in order to address the primary source bias in the overall entry.

While your assignment was to focus on eschatology in the Qur'an, your edits discuss general views on the subject (which involve the Qur'an and beyond). I'll accept this new section for the assignment.

Two comments on what needs improvement:

RE: Eschatological Views in the Early Muslim Period: first, rearrange the placement of this section as part of a historical discussion in the entry; its current placement near the end of the article doesn't make sense to me.

Watch your grammar, punctuation, and spelling: "Early" and "Period" do not need to be capitalized (there are other examples of common nouns that are capitalized I am not mentioning here, like "Classical," "Gardens," etc.).

"Tawhid" as you mention in the first sentence needs a bit more explanation--the way it reads now, I assume the term means "blasphemers," which it does not.

Who came up with the phrase "Limbo Theory of Islam?" What does this mean? (I see you explain this in the last sentence. Revise--it should be clearer in the beginning of this paragraph). Why is The Study Qur'an mentioned here in parenthesis?

In general, this section reads to me like a replication or very close paraphrasing of a scholarly discussion. You should go back and consider what this section is trying to add to the article, and revise your headings and paragraphs accordingly.

Preliminary grade: B Jaclyn-Michael (talk) 19:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)