User talk:Cedwgd1212

A goat for you!
YAY GOATS

Zyxcba123 (talk) 18:24, 21 February 2018 (UTC) 

Welcome!
Hello, Cedwgd1212, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review From Rob Alder
Rachael

Introduction

Introductory sentences are clear and concise and communicates the topic In the first sentence say that Left/Right discrimination “is” and not “refers to” to have more of a directive and factual statement You could possibly link other topics in the introduction like “Drexel University” since John R. Clark doesn’t Currently have a Wikipedia page Good usage of sources Organization

Organization is for the most part clear and has relevant content Bergen Left-Right Discrimination is talked about in the middle of Prevalence and sex difference. BLRD seems very important to talk about and may need its own subheading if there is enough research to discuss it. At the very least you can link it as an unknown article to have future editors possibly add it as a Wikipedia page

Tone and Balance

Tone and balance are good and offer clear communication of contextual ideas that aren’t confusing to the reader. Despite not knowing about the topic, I can roughly communicate what Left Right Confusion/Discrimination is about Throughout the article there is some issues with citations. In the “acquisition and comparison of spatial relations” there is a sentence that starts with “One study found…” and then doesn’t cite the study. This is done similarly again in “role of distraction” where it is said “Studies have shown…” but only references one citation.

References

There is a wide net of references, which most are scientific journals. The only nonscientific journals referenced and the Washington Post and NBC news, which is used exclusively for background information. Good job!

Existing Article

Compared to the existing article “Relative Direction” almost 20 sources are added and 3 new sub headings are introduced. The information from the original article is expanded upon in a neutral and professional way.

In conclusion, the article is a great start to the addition of “Relative Direction”. Keep in mind when revising to continue to have that neutral and concise tone that reference accurate and reliable sources. Remember the biggest part of project 3 is that this is a Wikipedia article so it needs to be easy to read for everyone.

Let me know if you have any questions!

Thanks, Rob Alder

A barnstar for you!
I’m so glad you appreciate it, thank you! Cedwgd1212 (talk) 15:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)