User talk:Hanmar94/sandbox

Article in need of more sources
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_powder
 * That's a good article to choose, but you may have to do a good bit of writing because it's very short. The "Application" section reads like a tutorial - not appropriate. Josef Horáček (talk) 18:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campfire — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanmar94 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * You added your sources well, but some of your writing reads too much like a tutorial. At the very least, you should avoid writing in the second person. Josef Horáček (talk) 07:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

additional sources
Schatz, John. "Summer Outdoor Safety." Mobility Forum: The Journal Of The Air Mobility Command's Magazine 10.2 (2001): 23. Academic Search Complete. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.

Rittman, Allison. "Campfire-Inspired Cooking." Prepared Foods 181.1 (2012): 79-84. Business Source Complete. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.

"The Good Kind Of Hot Spot." Backpacker 42.8 (2014): 74. MAS Ultra - School Edition. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.

Newman, Jared. "10 Steps For Getting Started With Rust." Time.Com (2014): 1. Academic Search Complete. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.

Wycoff, Ann. "Pulse: Outdoors." Women's Sports & Fitness (10996079) 3.4 (2000): 28. Academic Search Complete. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.
 * Your new article is a good choice, and your sources look excellent. When you edit the article, be sure not to repeat the mistakes of the previous editors - avoid writing it like a tutorial. Some of your sources seem to be tutorials. You can still use them as long as you present the info in encyclopedic style. Josef Horáček (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Assignment 1
Some of your edits in the article on the "comfort zone" are very good, some of them less so. First of all, you cannot change a quotation, even if it's awkwardly worded (unless you have a good reason for the change and you place the change in square brackets). So this sentence -- Judith M. Bardwick, author of Danger in the Comfort Zone, defines 'comfort zone' as "a behavioral state where a person operates in an anxiety-neutral position" -- should be changed back to what it was (unless you want to take out the quotation altogether and paraphrase the definition instead). Secondly, the opening clause "An example of a comfort zone may be when" replaced an awkward phrase with an equally awkward one. You could open the section with something like, "Self-image is an example of a comfort zone." Josef Horáček (talk) 18:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Assignment #3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_oil — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanmar94 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The structure of this article is not well balanced at all. This article is about amazon oil and it has no lead section. It also has no references. It doesn't really have anything except for a few examples of amazon oil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanmar94 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

The amazon is home to many essential oils. Some of them are very hard to find but most of them are found in plants. Oils from the amazon have many unique properties that can help restore the mind, body, and spirit. They can be used for many different things as well. Some people use them while cooking and others use them on their skin or hair for hydration. 19:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)Hanmar94 (talk) If you look at these oils at a cellular level, they have been proven to regulate activity and regenerate skin cells.
 * I'm not convinced that the article meets the notability requirement. Should it even exist? Are "Amazon oils" a well-established category in the health industry or some other field? Since there's no information in the article itself, you'd have to do a lot of research to write a good lead. Your draft right now isn't substantial enough. Keep in mind that you'd need to use library resources for your research. I recommend that you find a different article. I'm happy to give you an extension on the project if needed. Josef Horáček (talk) 07:37, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

New Article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_safety — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanmar94 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Good choice. The article is poorly organized and unbalanced, and a new lead will go a long way toward making it more comprehensible. You'll need to read the whole article and decide what the key points are. The key points are not always properly emphasized, which is something you will rectify with your lead. Josef Horáček (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * There's still much that could be improved in the lead. First of all, you need to delete the header and bring the lead above the TOC. The first sentence needs to be clarified. Josef Horáček (talk) 13:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)