User talk:Eli-Rangel/sandbox

Ruby Peer Review
Lead Section: I think that your lead section can be a bit more clear and direct as to summarizing what "Azelea" is about and what will be addressed in the article. You definitely have a start, but can add more onto it to make it more clear and complete!

Article: I think that the "Content" section is very important and you have good, neutral information. I agree, that you can probably try and find a different source to compound what you already have. Each section is relevant to your overall topic, I just think you can try and find more information to expand on what you already have.

References: I think that your references are all in the right places! For now, I think that looks good but I am not sure exactly how they are supposed to look.

Camille Peer Review
Hi Eli!

Lead: I think your article would be direct if you explain right from the get-go what the magazine is instead of jumping into the history right away. You could add more to the intro to give a little direction to the piece and set up what you will be delving into in the article.

Article: Great job at remaining neutral! I think you can go deeper with everything. Each section could be taken further. You have a good backbone foundation to this article -- just expand to fill it out a little. Finding a few more sources will help with this. :) Ooooh you might look for some images to add too! That would be interesting. It might be cool to have a "legacy" section to talk about the impact that the magazine has had/if anything has stemmed from this.

References: Honestly I don't know what the references are supposed to look like so I don't know how to helpful with it. It looks clean - I think you have space to have more internal references if you want :)

Great job, Camille — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgracethompson (talk • contribs) 03:58, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Kataryna Peer Review
Hi Eli! This is a super interesting topic, I’m glad you picked it.

Lead: I like how you jump right into the important information, but maybe a slower introduction with more details on what Azalea is exactly would work better.

Article: This definitely expands a little bit more on what the topic is which is great, but I encourage you to remain neutral and add more before and after your sources as segways to them, and what is meant to be drawn from them. I’m not sure how hard information is to find for this topic, but whatever you can add the better!

References: They seem to be in order and they look like they should I believe, but I’m no expert.

Overall: I think this is a great start to the project, there is hopefully more information you can add maybe about what inspired the magazine and/or the impact it had on society as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K.lewyckyj (talk • contribs) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)