User talk:Dbattis3/sandbox

Dom, It's not clear what this article is about. What's the focus? Where is it suppose to go? Maybe you could include some information from a journal or book. Cassell04 (talk) 01:36, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/business/18markets.html Dom BattistoneDbattis3 (talk) 22:24, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Dom, It's not clear what your topic is. Is it Iran? Is it Irak? Is it the war? If you're interested in the topic you might pick a general or battle that was particularly important. You could pick a US policy that influenced the war. You could pick a US diplomat who might have played a role. At the moment the draft needs more attention.Cassell04 (talk) 13:34, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

You should probably section off your information into categories when you begin to right your full article as well as making a separate section for your sources. That, along with defining what the focus of the article will be, is the biggest bit of advise for the draft itself along with some grammar and punctuation checks for the final draft. Jaredbawner (talk) 19:08, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Doug Girard's peer review 10/12/18
I like that the content of your draft is neutral and states many different effects on Iraqi Politics. There are a lot of strong points in this draft that need to be built on. The sources are credible too. I would suggest adding more content and structuring the draft more. Adding a introduction, background, and other sub headings would help. DougGirard19 (talk) 23:10, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

You seem to do some speculation, or at least appear to - "so a peaceful customer is likely a high priority for Iran, foreign policy wise" - is an example of this. Rephrasing this to reduce this may help. Your sources are good, and besides perhaps length I can't find any problems with your revisions.

Matthewdrago (talk) 02:20, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Matthew Drago's Peer Review 3/10/19
The primary problem that I can see is the length of the addition, far below the minimum requirements. There are also several grammatical errors ('western- leaning', ' "‘Generally speaking...', ' not my business. [1]" ') which are easily fixable. The citation should not be in the quote, but after it, for example. I am also not entire sure what article this section is for - it is not marked in the dashboard or in your sandbox. It may be me just missing it entirely, but nevertheless it makes it difficult to review your draft.

There also seems to be only one source for the entire draft, and it is only for a quote. Most statements that are completely unsourced and appear to be unsupported. One thing you can do to improve your draft is to link to pages that may be related - you mentioned, for example Andrei Kozyrev, who was the Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time. Linking to his page improves yours when you mention him. Your draft has potential, and of all of these issues are fixed it can be improved immensely.

Matthewdrago (talk) 02:20, 11 March 2019 (UTC)