User talk:Charlisomers/Symbolic interaction

Instructor feedback for article draft
Good start overall. I think you are building toward some nice contributions to the existing symbolic interactionism article. As I was reading your draft I was assuming the bolded text was your new additions. However, some of the regular text appears to be copied from the article, while other regular text appears to have been revised a bit, mostly in phrasing, grammar, and style. Overall, I think there needs to be more content added to the existing article for a stronger contribution. I think you are adding some nice clarifications to the lead and background sections. The recognition of Cooley is important.

The core principles section has good information, but it seems like the existing article includes much of this information already. How is your version different? What is the difference between Blumer's three core principles and three basic propositions? They seem the same to me.

The central interactionist themes and five central ideas sections seem to be mostly copied from the existing article. If this is the case it should not have been included in your sandbox draft.

The application section has the right idea, but it needs to be a expanded quite a bit by including specific examples of research in some of the areas listed. Describe one or more studies in a particular topic area by providing a summary of the findings and implications.

I'm a little confused about the first paragraph in the critique section. For example, what does "deprived of a real social envision" mean? The second paragraph in this section is a bit better, but could use some clarifying. Try to use simple language and descriptions approachable to a wide audience.

Remember to use proper APA style throughout which includes using initials for first names and capitalizing only the first word in an article title and including all of the journal article information (volume, page numbers, etc). Jrpederson (talk) 03:54, 11 October 2019 (UTC)