User talk:Gilly22

Welcome!
Hello, Gilly22, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Blythwood (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello from me!
Thank you for coming along today. Don't forget to do the tutorials in the Dashboard, and I'll see you next week! Cbderbylib (talk) 12:23, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Peter Parker Article Feedback
Hi Andy

The article is generally very well-written but some copyediting is needed. For example, the second paragraph of the lead section begins 'Peter is depicted as an intellectually-gifted and bright.' Is 'man' supposed to be at the end of the sentence? The lead section/introduction is quite long and could be shortened. Some of the introduction seems like plot so that could be added to another section. It is generally well-structured but some specific comments were: remove the empty notes section, more headings/subheading would add even more structure and there was a suggestion to include all Peter Parker's appearances to the Infobox, not just his first and last. The enemies section is very lengthy so could be shortened, whilst the Reception section could be slightly longer to match the length of the Creation section. Wikilinks are well-used throughout the article. Coverage is balances, mostly neutral and unbiased but someone also noticed some use of opinionated language. Competing viewpoints are well represented though someone commented that more sources could be used in the Reception section. Good choice of sources - varied and well-selected - but more could be used when looking at the length of the overall article. General consensus is we have no idea if the images are okay to use???? No copyright violations but it was suggested that the longer quote could be paraphrased. No subjective statements!

Cxssbailey (talk) 11:36, 26 March 2019 (UTC)