User talk:Hunni22/sandbox

Hunni22's peer review by Laurenfeiman
Your additions are very good, all non-biased additions that really help explain the graphs on the original Wikipedia page. Your source 1 does not link to any sources and your source three is a repeat of source two. The only other addition I can think of adding is naming the specific Country's you are talking about just so readers can find exactly what you are analyzing and maybe state what stat you are looking at. Over all I think once the citations are fixed and if you have a chance to add a bit more detail to the sentences this is ready to add to the original article and will greatly improve the original.Laurenfeiman (talk) 02:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Andy's Peer Review
The information that you provide adds more details to what is already presented which is nice to help the reader understand what they are looking at but the things you have added need to be more general wording in my opinion more academic wording which will make it better as a wikipedia editor. Your citations look good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACdenver6465 (talk • contribs) 05:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Response to peer review
I think everything you are adding will make your additions to the wikipedia artical even better then it already was. Im glad you will be adding names like Niger and Eritrea it will make the artical easyer to understand and follow. Laurenfeiman (talk) 22:47, 10 April 2018 (UTC)