User talk:Earleyc/sandbox

Hey Chris,

Lead: I thought you had a very strong lead. I honestly don't have much to advise on. I thought you provided adequate information on the meetings time, location and general meeting details without elaborating too far.

Structure: I thought the two headings you chose structured you page well. I liked how you finished with final address. Its fighting you conclude your article with the conclusion of the convention.

Coverage: You maintain a neutral stance throughout your page. I think you could add more to the convention proceedings section. You can find my suggestions below.

Sources: First off, nice find with your newspaper article. The rest of your sources seem great.

Writing Suggestions: I would suggest adding in what some of the other resolutions made at the convention were exactly to add more context. You could also discuss some of the committees that formed at the convention.

Laiacond (talk) 23:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Chris!

How could your peer improve the lead? - Your lead is very well written! It is covers the who, what, where, and why of your convention very well. I don't think I would add anything to your lead.

Is the overall article structure clear? - Your structure is very clear and organized chronologically, which is helpful and makes sense. I would make your title larger in text size than your headings because they are currently all the same size.

Is there balanced coverage of the topic? Is the tone neutral? - I think you cover the overall topic very well and your tone is neutral. I don't have any recommendations for you for this. You did great!

Are the sources reliable? - All your sources seems very reliable. I see a newspaper article, some books, and scholarly articles. There is also a blog but it seems to go with the topic well.

What proofreading or writing suggestions do you have to improve the article? - There are a few commas you could add, so I would just read over your article to double check for mistakes. Otherwise, your article is clear and written well!

What other things would you add or fix in the article? - I would add some external links and a "See Also" section. Maybe get rid of the bibliography section? I'm not mad about it though and it looks nice, so it's whatever you want to do. Great job overall!Addiedaye (talk) 05:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)