User talk:Etriusus/New sandbox

Article Evaluation by Sam Charaf: Overall, I think this is a really great draft. It seems like you've just about doubled the amount of content currently on the page. I think the only thing that could be improved is the content section, because I only vaguely know what is included in the book. But I understand that it is tricky due to the subject matter.

Creation:

-maybe change "vets" to "veterans"? I think we want to use as precise language as possible.

-what are peaceniks? maybe add a link so the reader can look up what it is

-change "Comabt" to "combat"

-Who is Lyle Stuart? This is not clear, maybe add a signal phrase saying who it is

-change "treats" to "threats"

Content:

-maybe remove the word "therefore", as it may suggest original research

-change "extant" to "extent"

-change "the bulk if its" to "the bulk of its"

Film:

-maybe change "challenges to its content" just to "censorship"? flows a little better

Legality:

-the first sentence in this section is unfinished

-Who is Thomas Spinks?

Peer Evaluation by Ruth Axton:

In the creation section, I think it would be helpful to include a definition of peaceniks as some readers may not be familiar with the word. A small thing, make sure that all book titles are in italics. In the second paragraph of this section, I think it would be helpful for the readers to describe what the "silent majority" is in the eyes of the author.

Overall in the Author Remorse section, I think more information would be helpful. Whether that information comes from an interview with the author or somewhere else I think this is very important to the page overall.

I think what you have added to the content section is very helpful, especially, because there was nothing there previously. It will help the readers understand more what is going on throughout the rest of the page. For that reason, I think it would be helpful to move it up closer to the lead section oft the page because I believe understanding what occurs in the book helps aid in understanding the author and his remorse.

The description added to the response section is also very helpful because the sentence that was left from before is leaves many questions left unanswered. One minor question that I had was, what form of mass media was it?

In the legality section, make sure to finish the first sentence I think that it was accidentally left unfinished. In the second sentence, it would be helpful to include a description of who Thomas Spinks is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruthaxton (talk • contribs) 19:02, 15 April 2019 (UTC)