User talk:Chale ASM/sandbox

You have really good information. I would defiantly go through and proof read. Some sentences ran on or were a little confusing. I would look into changing "got independence" to "was independent". Take a look at the paragraph about her work, before you start listing what she did the transition was a little weird. Other than that it looks great, you have good information, more is always better but I know some people have limited resources. Keep up the good work!!

There's really good information on here, just minor grammar details. There should be an ending parenthesis after you give examples of her advocacy, and then the line where you say she's the first female president after Mozambique "got independent", I would suggest to change it to "gained it's independence". Other than those, this is a pretty cool read. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyannaandrews (talk • contribs) 19:54, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * gained its* independence Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

feedback
Hi a few things--
 * per MOS:SURNAME, once you've established the subject of the article, refer to them by their surname for the rest of the article. At times you refer to her as "Veronica Macamo" and at others "Dlovo" or "Veronica."
 * You have uncited information, which I have tagged
 * Per MOS:LEAD, the lead paragraph (first paragraph(s) of the article before the table of contents) should summarize the rest of the article. Therefore, no content in the lead should be "new." Everything in the lead should be pulled from the body of the article.
 * Watch language such as absolutes ("She has always been involved in social work, women organizations"). Always? With an encyclopedia, you should have factual and verifiable statements. An example would be "Dlovo frequently works to support women's rights, and has supported legislation such as x y and z." I'm avoiding an absolute and I'm providing evidence to support my claim that she support's women's rights.
 * Watch relative language ("...played an important role in the creation of different laws (ex: protection against teenagers marriage and children abuse) that are still being used up to now.") Besides the grammar issues with this sentence, you again want to provide factual, verifiable information. You should assume this article will still exist in the future. Imagine yourself as a reader 5 years into the future. They will read the sentence ending with "up to now" and think that it means up to their current time. However, you only mean "up until 2018".

Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)