User talk:Casey518/sandbox

The links and references that you add are all relevant, however, They are all the same so I think that finding other sources would be helpful in making your information more credible.Egbe Imariagbe (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Your beginning is great for this article but there are just a couple of points I would maybe modify. First, the links and references that you provide are all the same so I think that finding other sources would be helpful. Also, adding more information with sub-headings could really improve your overall contribution to the article. Lastly, some of your sentences have words that uninformed readers might not understand so rather than linking them you could have the full word in parentheses; for instance "AK-47s". Carlapicasso (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Casey518,

I like where you are going with this portion of the arms trafficking page on market value of the industry. Some sentences, like these ones, need cleaning up for clarity, objectivity and neutrality purposes:

Lastly, we need citations... I have no idea what sources you are using to produce this information... I know it's in the annotated bibliography but still include it in your sandbox so it's easier to transfer to the main page later.

If I am an uninformed reader of this page, will I know what SALW means? I know it means Small Arms and Light Weapons, but still good to mention.

Hope this helps!

Regards, Rapidrider Rapidrider (talk) 16:52, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Casey518 -

I think you have a good start to your section! Like mentioned in the feedback above make sure you add citations. In addition to that, you can link words such as market value, black market, and Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW), so people who do not know what they mean can easily go to a page about them rather than you having to explain it. Also see if you can link different types of weapons that you mention, that would be helpful for readers to get a better understanding of how the costs go along with them and what they are. I personally do not know much about them, so I think it would be very useful.

Also, as we went over in class to not use loaded words. In the first sentence you say "can be very difficult to estimate." I would either change the wording to use non-evaluating words or quote it to show a source said it.

You briefly mention that "The illicit market for small arms fluctuates as different global conflicts arise." Are you going to talk more about this? I think it could add to your writing, but I would only include it if you plan to talk more about it. I think it could be beneficial because it is a big reasons prices change. Maybe just word it differently before you start talking about the AK-47 and civil war to help lead to the part.

I think that the tables you include will be helpful in your writing and are a good idea to show trends as you mention. Maybe that can be a different paragraph, separate from your first one. Not sure how much we are planning on writing.

Oliviaohearn (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Wow, I really like this table that you added! It is very informative and well thought out. It also reads very well. I do not think you need to say "alone" in the second sentence though. Also, do you think there would be a way to cite or refer to the table instead of saying (see table)? It would read better that way. Cbettica65 (talk) 12:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

The table looks very concise! I think it would be good if you were to refer to the table in a different way. Regarding the actual citations, please figure out the repeated citations.Bokyung0327 (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

You may not need to link the "Small Arms and Light Weapons" every time you write it. All three of your citations are the same thing, or at least it appears to be. Also for the sentence that reads, "After being processed by customs, that number increases to somewhere between US$5-7 Billion, according to Small Arms and Light Weapons", maybe put the "...according to Small Arms and Light Weapons" part at the beginning of the sentence. Fields18x (talk) 13:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Nice use of statistics and factual evidence! The citation numbers should be placed after the punctuation marks. Additonally, I think you should reword the last sentence, so that it flows better.Awhite07 (talk) 13:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Looks very good, good use of stats and evidence. I would add some more citations and make the flow of the paragraph more fluid. Other than that I would add a couple pictures to demonstrate what you're talking about.Henrykuv (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I like that your paragraph is very factual and straightforward I would just suggest to try and find more sources from different places seeing that your two sources are from the same website. Sophieb905 (talk) 00:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I like how use key words and hyperlinks, however I feel that you should add more sources so that you add more depth to your paragraph on the market value of arms trafficking. Overall, I enjoyed your paragraph although some sentences seemed subjective to your opinion. Just different phrasing would help. Benitalukose (talk) 02:09, 6 April 2019 (UTC)Benita Lukose

Great start! Really enjoyed the substance of your paragraph. Only suggestion that can diversify your information is using more than 2 sources of the same website. This will help you achieve a more broad perspective regarding your topic. I would also suggest adding a visual to make your page look more interesting! --Laylaserna (talk) 23:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)