User talk:Cxssbailey

Welcome!
Hello, Cxssbailey, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Blythwood (talk) 23:53, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Heyo
Hey girl

Keep up the good work!

Lots of Love, gossip girl xoxo

Amyrussell1 (talk) 10:00, 5 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Doing great work there! WikiEmz (talk) 10:02, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You go girl! SofiaSaghir (talk) 10:02, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * So many positive affirmations and lots of love wow <3 Cxssbailey (talk) 10:03, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello from me!
Thank you for coming along today. Don't forget to do the Sandbox tutorial in the Dashboard, and I'll see you next week! Cbderbylib (talk) 12:24, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Greenhouse Academy
Overall your article is well structured, contains a good range of information, with minimal typos and errors in grammar. While the lead section is clear and easy to understand, it does not completely relate to the article, with an over-detailed summary. The structure is successful in arranging your information, with clear thematic division.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Clearly written, in good prose, with correct spelling and grammar? YES: 6 NO: 0 Comments: Small typos, some poor grammar and clearly written.

Does is contain a clear, easy-to-understand lead section? YES: 7 NO: 0 Comments: Include plot summary in main article, lead section does not relate to the article, clear and well summarised.

Does it have clear structure, with headings/sub-headings arranged chronologically or thematically? YES: 7 NO: 0 Comments: Clear thematic division, reception placed after production, well structured.

Are sections balanced? YES: 5 NO: 2 Comments: Episode synopsis is over detailed, and requires completing.

Appropriate use of Wikilinks? YES: 7 NO: 0 Comments: Well used, could have more, add links to genres and cast members.

Coverage neutral and without bias? YES: 6 NO: 0

Represent competing viewpoints equally? YES: 4 NO: 1 Comments: Coverage is largely positive

Reliable sources used? YES: 7 NO: 0 Comments suitable to the task, perhaps remove Instagram source.

Contain statements that lack verification? YES: 0 NO: 7 Comments:

Comply with image use policy? YES: 1 NO: 1 Comments: Is the image free used or Netflix property?

Free from obvious copyright violations? YES: 4 NO: 0 Comments: Unsure.

Subjective value statements used? YES: 1 NO: 5 Comments: Conforms to Wikipedia style guidelines.

Lianne99 (talk) 11:36, 26 March 2019 (UTC)