User talk:Dneverson/sandbox

Brandon's Peer Review
•	The lead section is informative, giving a good overview of the article. I could read that and leave the page with a decent idea of what the word means and its origins.

•	I noticed in the lead section there are some quoted definitions that appear to be direct quotes. It might be better to try to paraphrase rather than direct quoting.

•	In the People section, there is another direct quote from a source that would be better paraphrased.

•	There are occasional bits off information that are lacking an attribution.

•	The lead gives a brief history of the word’s origins, and I think the article could benefit with a section dedicated to the history of the word.

•	In the People section, the sentence, “Professional relationships are successful when two or more business partners come together and benefit from one another, but personal relationships require more common interests outside of business” seems to veer more toward opinion and could be removed from the article.

•	The page might benefit from more links to other pages for better understanding. For example, when the Mitford sisters are mentioned, if there is another Wikipedia page dedicated to them, it would benefit the article to link to it, so the reader knows who they are.

•	Overall, the references look to be reputable, and as you expand the article, I’m sure you’ll add more to it to help with the article’s validity.Bcmac550 (talk) 05:05, 1 March 2019 (UTC)