User talk:Ddurandisse/sandbox

Good overall start, but your information and citations are really lacking. I am sure you can provide more information before submitting it for review. Make sure you introduce your topic for the contribution of the article. Carlapicasso (talk) 16:34, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Good introductory sentences! Don’t forget to cite your sources. Additionally, I think you should find sources to explain how there is a connection between science and feminism. Maybe you can include the names and work of the people who recognized the connection between science and feminism. Lastly, you may not need this sentence, “Until recently, very little contact has occurred between the two communities” because it seems like you stated something similar in the first and second sentence of the paragraph. Great start!Awhite07 (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with Asiah, I find this intersection in the communities very interesting and have actually found some sources on it if you would like them, I think put one or two on the shared bibliography if you would like check it out!Sophieb905 (talk) 23:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I'd recommend starting the section off what just a quick basic introduction to post-modern feminism to give the wiki readers the meat and potatoes, something like: "Post-modern feminism attempts to highlight women's rights, encourage equality between men and women, and allow women to take control of their own body and mind", and then get into the history and creation of it. Rickyderas (talk) 13:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Make sure you add section headings here so we know where this information will be placed in the Wikipedia article. Make sure you are more direct to the reader, they should be able to read through your section quickly and should be able to gather the main point quickly. Make sure you are adding citations to your work as I do not know where you are getting this information from. Also link key words in your work to get this article out there. Lastly you say "Until recently, very little contact has occurred between the two communities" with minimal effort I researched and found that there has been significant studies on this topic dating back to 1970, so you might want to do some fact checking in your work. Casey518 (talk) 13:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Casey O'Connor

Make sure you cite and add footnotes as well as subsections! The second sentence reads a little weird, so I would try to reword that one. The use of "that" in the second sentence is kind of confusing as I am not sure if you are talking about the lack of connection or not. In the sentence that starts with "However in the past two decades," I think it would sound better if you said "feminist historians and scientific philosophers" as the noun-adjectives will match up. Other than that, great job! Cbettica65 (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Rapidrider Peer Review
This is written like an opinion piece. Try to be objective at least... this is a wholly unsubstantiated claim: "a woman's body is more important than ever to her rights as a human." I think Casey is right, please do some more research before publishing. Sources are key in making a good Wikipedia article. It sounds like you heavily borrowed from your annotated bibliography for part of this as well... Large content gaps.

Hopefully these suggestions/ critiques make sense.

Regards, Rapidrider (talk) 13:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Where is your citation and footnotes? You should make sure to show the readers that your source is credible. You should also break down your work into subsections. However, I do like your facts and information. Robertpark1999 (talk) 13:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)robertpark1999

Good start. However, none of your information is backed up by statistics/facts. You also should add footnotes, citing, and inserts to other websites through the citing of words. You have a good start, but not credible for what wikipedia is looking for. Miaeschlidt (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Good start. Don't forget to add citations and link other Wikipedia pages for more information on similar topics. Try to remain neutral while writing, stay fact-driven rather than personal preferance.Henrykuv (talk) 16:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

When you write "This source", what source are you referring to? It seems like you are switching the topic around a lot, as if there are three different things you are trying to discuss. The main point of the paragraph is not clear. Fields18x (talk) 01:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Don't forget to add headers and link the article you are editing. Also, add citations, as of now we do not know where this information is coming from. When you say "This source..." is that a note to yourself? If not, I would take it out/replace it. Oliviaohearn (talk) 01:55, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Add some sources, and citations as well as some key words. Additionally, I would suggest adding a heading. Benitalukose (talk) 03:14, 6 April 2019 (UTC) Benita Lukose

Hi, I think you need more informations. It would be very neat if you were to include some key words. I would suggest adding headings too.Bokyung0327 (talk) 01:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)