User talk:Fariha34/sandbox

I think the content of your work is very important and beneficial. I like how the first paragraph was explaining broadly the topic and in the second paragraph is where you got more specific. I think the second paragraph could be expanded a bit more. Also, I really liked how you linked different pages in your paragraphs. Overall, I think you did a very good job! Isabelleshegog (talk) 19:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)Isabelle

I love how you cover a lot of different aspects in your two paragraphs. I think the second paragraph is very strong and specific but the first feels a little bit scattered. I also think you want to be careful with not taking any specific angle on the topic. Other than that, I think you did really well brining in relevant facts to your writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wohlina (talk • contribs) 15:05, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

You did a great job with sources, links and content overall. Your paragraphs are fact-driven and well-researched. My only note would be to organize your thoughts. Adding subsections may be useful. Great job!Ashleydavidsongwu (talk) 16:30, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Your sandbox is already well organized. There are many hyperlinks that you connected to other pages, but there are few words that I think is unecessary to specifically marked out. For example, media, gender-related, and magazines. Koko413 (talk) 15:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Fariha, the topic that you chose as well as the organization of your sandbox are very good! I just have a few comments about the content and citation links. I think there are too many many details in the first and second paragraph and the idea that you want to transmit is not flowing as to how it should. You should focus more on fact-driven ideas. About the citation, we saw in class that Wikipedia doesn't like one paragraph with only one citation (this the case on almost all of your paragraphs). You should explore more citations and add them to your sandbox.Rafamatalon1234 (talk) 15:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

You have broadened my mind on stereotypes in advertising. It is interesting to see the difference between male and female roles. I would like to see more information given on the female and male role part. Charlier118 (talk) 16:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree that this is a well organized article and I love how completed it looks. I recommend a quick read through to fix surface errorsSocksOfDeath (talk) 16:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Nice work! I would just say that every time you name someone when saying "according to ___," you say who they are or what field they are in, just so that as a reader we understand better their authority to contribute to the topic. Also your first numbered sentence could be a bit clearer, it seems bulky. "A woman's only place is in her home," or something like that. Lastly, I would just proofread a little as you have a few grammar/syntax errors (For example, second to last paragraph, delete the "as" in "they are seen as shy and gentle, which makes youth stereotype[S] characterize...") Keep it up! :) Isamouse79 (talk) 16:23, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Great job on your work! This is a very interesting topic. I would like to know more on femal and males roles and how they compare and contrast.ChristalCao (talk) 16:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Great job! I like your content. If you could use more special transitional words will be better to connect your content and building a better format.Samuelzhao000005 (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Samuelzhao000005

Great Job! It is well researched and there is a lot of informaation offered. I would just try to incorpotrate different sources in teh same paragraph so that you don't have one large paragraph on only one source. Lorenaramirezl (talk) 01:07, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Good job! Maybe add some sources and citations in the first paragraph. Sydneycurrie5 (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2019 (UTC)