User talk:Gdavis98/sandbox

HI GABE - THIS IS SOME FEEDBACK FROM ANNE HYDE. MY COMMENTS ARE IN CAPS. GREAT START ON THIS WITH A BIG CHUNK OF MATERIAL IN YOUR SANDBOX. YOU MADE GOOD PROGRESS ON ADDING TO THE ARTICLE. I THINK STICKING TO THE FORMAT THAT WAS ALREADY THERE IS JUST FINE.

BE CAREFUL WITH THAT OPENING SENTENCE. IT IS TRICKY AND YOU HAVE TO GET A LOT OF INFORMATION IN A FEW WORDS. SO IF YOU ARE SETTING THIS UP AS THE PREAMBLE TO PONTIAC'S REBELLION, YOU HAVE TO QUICKLY SAY WHO HE IS. YOU'VE ADDED A LOT OF GREAT CLEAR MATERIAL TO NARRATE WHAT HAPPENED. BECAUSE YOUR READERS ARE LOOKING FOR BASIC INFORMATION AND DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE TOPIC, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO INTRODUCE PEOPLE A BIT MORE. YOU CAN ALSO USE LINKS TO OTHER WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES TO PROVIDE MORE BACKGROUND. TO LET READERS KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS SIEGE IS THINK ABOUT WHERE THE STORY SHOULD END - THE END OF THE SIEGE OR WHAT HAPPENS LATER. WHAT HAPPENS TO PONTIAC AND THE OTTAWA? AGAIN YOU CAN LINK TO THE PAGE ON PONTIAC'S REBELLION FOR SOME OF THAT.

KEEP YOUR SENTENCES SIMPLE AND GET SOMEONE TO READ IT WHO KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE TOPIC - THEY WILL HAVE USEFUL ADVICE ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED.

KEEP ADDING MATERIAL, BUT I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR THE NEXT DRAFT IS ADDING CITATIONS. LOOK AT SOME OTHER HISTORY ARTICLES THAT DESCRIBE BATTLES AND YOU'LL SEE THAT REALLY GOOD ONES HAVE A CITATION FOR ALMOST EVERY SENTENCE. YOU CAN FIND MORE MATERIAL ON THE OU LIBRARY WEBSITE BY SEARCHING FOR THE SIEGE, BUT ALSO FOR PONTIACS REBELLION. A LOT OF THAT MATERIAL WILL BE AVAILABLE ONLINE - ESPECIALLY ARTICLES, SO DEPEND ON THOSE MORE THAN BOOKS, GIVEN THAT WE CAN'T CHECK BOOKS OUT JUST NOW!! OLDER STUFF IS DIGITIZED BUT NEWER BOOKS AREN'T AS MUCH.

HERE IS A CHECK SHEET YOU CAN USE TO THINK THROUGH NEXT STEPS AND HOW TO REVISE THE ARTICLE FOR A STRONGER, FINAL VERSION.

GREAT JOB ON THIS. . .AND KEEP GOING. ANNE HYDE

LEAD: Does your lead summarize the entire article by briefly covering all important aspects of the topic? Does it work as an outline for the whole article?

First sentence: does it serve as a definition of the article topic, with the topic itself — be it a person, place, thing, idea or concept — in bold, and a brief description that puts it into context.

(Example: Anna Anderson (c. 16 December 1896 – 12 February 1984) was the best known of several impostors who claimed to be Grand Duchess Anastasia of Russia.)

BODY: Fact-based, not persuasive writing. The article is a description of the information you can find about a topic, based on good sources.

Did you write in your own words? Check that the article doesn’t contain excessive quotations, or copy any sources, even if you’ve given them credit.

Does the article let the reader decide for themselves? Avoid persuasive language? Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral?

Did you proofread? Basic grammar and spelling are correct? Complete sentences? Remove first-person (“I/we”) or second-person (“you”) writing.

Formal tone and simple language? No technical language or jargon? Check that you’ve explained acronyms and jargon in simple English the first time you use them.

Is your formatting consistent with the rest of Wikipedia? No bullet-pointed lists or too many headings in your article.

SOURCES: Is every claim cited to a reliable source?

Are there unsourced statements? Are there enough sources

Are the sources reliable and authoritative. Does each source have citations – footnotes, bibliography, etc.

Good sources include textbooks or academic journals. Don’t cite blog posts.

Afh1858 (talk) 22:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)