User talk:Emlou9/sandbox

Your draft is very good, it is concise, you present facts clearly and were able to provide examples of AWS from varying cultures as well. I assume the names in parenthesis are your sources, I recommend citing sources in your lead in order for it not to appear as a thesis statement. If you are using one source for a whole section or majority of a section you can cite the source at the end of that section, for example, your section on South Korea and the sentences following the Torregrosa citation in the Latin America section, can be cited at the end of the section if they information you are conveying derive from the same source. The only real critiques I have of your draft are the use of the word "analogous" in the third sentence of your lead. Analogous implies comparison and sort of sways from the goal of a neutral tone. I just recommend rephrasing that specific word choice so it does not appear you are drawing comparisons between countries to make one seem greater than the other. In the South Korea section, the first sentence is fine but the information and statistics following could be interpreted as bias and a condemnation of South Korea failing to meet their gender quotas. To ensure a more neutral tone I would recommend providing the names of the authors of the quotes and statistics used and advice in using phrases such as "according to". I would also suggest attempting to implement the perspectives of both male and female representatives in these respective countries. Overall good work I believe your contribution will greatly improve this article.

Review from Keara: I see that you already added your draft to the article. Good job citing in text with those little footnotes. The lead is good, provided a brief description of what an AWS is. I particularly like that you mentioned at the end that this practice has mixed results and left it at that so the reader can go to the section on the impact. Part of the Latin America section was confusing to me, “ Political parties with more bureaucratized, stricter candidate selection processes in Latin American countries with legislative body quotas run women as, on average, 37.8% of their candidates for legislative bodies, while in those parties with less formalized selection processes, on average, women constitute 31.5% of candidates (Bjarnegård and Zetterberg)” If a possible rewording could be done here or even making it multiple sentences to make it clearer, I think that would help. The South Korea section was pretty clear. You did a nice job at staying neutral. If we were required to write more or even if you just wanted to anyway, I think that the section on impact could use some work particularly on neutrality and times when these quotas where not impactful like you mentioned in South Korea. I know you didn’t write this section, but it’s just a suggestion for further improvement of the article. Feel free to ignore this part.