User talk:Cpara2/sandbox

1. yes uses biased sources how Walt Disney companies use sexism in princess movies 2. there are citations included in the end of the article. but there should be citations in the information that you put. 3. yes every edit is substantial 4. yes every thing is clear and well written.

Keyri's Peer Review
Keyriambrocio (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) 1 The edit does not sound biased at all. It shows different perspectives surrounding feminism in Disney movies, particularly with the Disney princesses. #2 Some citations are included, but more can be added to show that this information comes from various reliable sources and not just one. I would add more citations where they are missing from a variety of sources.
 * 2) 3 The edit feels substantial because every sentence is informational, but some citations may be missing where the article section talks about others' perspectives about Disney princesses.
 * 3) 4 Every sentence is worded well and there is no passive sentence structure. No wording is awkward and everything is clear and easy to understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyriambrocio (talk • contribs) 16:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review Response
Thank you both for your feedback! When going back and editing I plan to include more sources. I also hope to find more than one source that supports this information I am presenting. However, it has been hard to find sources that are professional and not blog posts or popular sources. However, I plan to find at least two more sources that are professional. Again thank you for stating that my edits were substantial, my goal again is to have 3 different sources in total. Cpara2 (talk) 17:04, 1 May 2018 (UTC)