User talk:Cpetryshyn/sandbox

Peer Review
Lead evaluation: The lead is concise, however, it lacks the information that you added to it. Content evaluation: I think what you have added is wonderful. It perhaps could be expanded including the spiritual dignity of women, her leadership as the only female Alvar, or the elevation of female gendered roles to the divine. These areas may help you link Andal more firmly in the history of feminism. We also talked in class about the global cross cultural link of mysticism relating to autonomy...potentially linking Andal into some of those narratives could be helpful or starting adding these names under a new section of virginal/bridal feminism. that may be too much of a project, but linking the paradox of power within a culture could be a good start. Tone and balance evaluation: Your approach is very directly feminist, however, I think it is still neutral and evens out within the broader scope of the article. Organization evaluation: Content is clear and effectively communicates your point. I wonder if moving either the Women groups inspired by Andal section or the Feminist Interpretation section to be closer to each other would give a better flow or make the article less disjointed. I'm not such which ordering would best fit the argument that you are trying to make. Images and media evaluation: Some images depicting some of the prose mentioned or literary paintings might be beneficial. The works included do seem sufficient. Overall evaluation: I think the information you added seemed like a good fit in expanding the article. It might be helpful to include it in the intro and making some more links outside of the article itself. Great work with what you added! Alibarnabenelson (talk) 02:44, 9 November 2019 (UTC)