User talk:Hcritchfieldjain/sandbox

Great contributions here. The expanded details on what was originally just a vague mention (e.g. of the 1927 fire and the WWII airfoil designs) are informative.

I would suggest adding citations specifically for two specific points that read like interpretations without citations. First, the claim that Munk had trouble adapting to NACA organizational culture, and second, that the VDT put America at the pinnacle of airplane development. Jillianefoley (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review for Censorship by Apple
Nice additions so far! I think you've pulled out a lot of interesting information to add to the article and I'm excited to see the end result.

Some notes:

- While I 100% agree with the sentiment, referring to Infowars content as "offensive" may be considered "not neutral" by Wikipedia's standards. I'm not sure if this would be viewed as too opinionated by Wikipedians.

- I like the organization of the the "Censorship By Nation" segment, and I think your prose is good. Maybe you could think of ways to organize/expand on the other parts of the article in a similar manner? It currently very much reads like a list, and many points aren't really fleshed out.

- The App Store section in particular isn't organised that well. It has things like "Newspaper and magazine content" as a broad heading, but also has "baby shaker", as specific case, as another broad heading

- So far, most of your sources seem to be news articles, which is fair given the nature of your topic. I wonder if there have been any technical/research papers written on the topic? This seems like a topic that might have gotten some attention from the computing world.

Echowisp (talk) 05:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review by CensorshipStudent123!
I particularly like the "Censorship by Nation" section that you added. One suggestion I might have is to possibly include more links to other entries that detail background information of the political/social climate in these countries so that if a reader is curious about what is driving these censorship patterns, they have a source of reference.

Additionally, on your point about potential other section titles for this content so as to avoid confusion that these acts of censorship were imposed by the governments of these nations and not Apple, I think it might be worth considering adding a paragraph clarifying that before you go into the countries specifically, rather than just changing the title. I do think, though, that "Censorship by Nation" is the best name for the section as it stands.

Lastly, as a side note, this may just be on my computer, but some of your citations (i.e. citation about the emoji restriction by China) are showing up in a strange formatting on my end.

Great work overall! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CensorshipStudent123! (talk • contribs) 15:55, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Harry's Peer Review
- I think you do an excellent job of presenting both sides. This is not just an attack on Apple for constraining information. Rather, it reads as an unbiased information source which is really great. - I loved the reorganization of the article - the previous version of this article was all over the place and lacked grounding. - You have done a really good job adding citations. However, maybe consider cleaning up a few of the New York Times citations - I think it is fine to use NYT once or twice, but you tend to use them quite a lot - This article is very applicable and clearly touches a wide audience. Making it clear that it is important is vital to any article, and I think you do just that - You could remove a couple of adjectives / modifiers in your language to make the article more neutral. - The most improvement is in the leading section - you added citations, links, and more information - The best part, by far, is censorship by nation. This addition really rounds out the article; however, why did you pick the countries that you did? If you add more countries, maybe add region headings for the sake of flow. Hannahgoss (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)