User talk:Hwilliams989/sandbox

Haley's Peer Review
Lead/Intro Very clear. Talking about women in sports. Though it could be narrowed a little bit. How are women valued in sports? Is there a difference between them spectating and playing the sport? How is it viewed culturally? Is there any historical significance? Clear Structure It has a clear flow, like reading a story. Balance When adding more sources maybe add a few to broaden the point's you've already made. Also, you have some jargon that presents bias. Such as "Sports have always been of tremendous impact to the world as a whole" etc. Just be careful when wording things. Though, wording that sentence differently would still present bias so make sure you're only representing other sources bias and not your own. Neutral Content The beginning is great, there's not much wording that shows any influence on your opinion. The last two paragraphs have a lot of wording that presents bias. Also, adding some perspectives where women have been in sports and then perspectives where they haven't would round your article out well. Sources They're good. Just remember to find sources to fill in the bias. Five Points 1 The article had really good flow and the middle paragraph (on the first source) was worded very well. 2 Try to look over the source and remove the bias statements. Adding sources for that bias is a good way to clean it up without deleting anything. 3 The most important thing would be when you add new sources to make sure they support your current claims or would broaden your topic. 4 I need to work on adding more information from my sources then just one sentence summaries so this is a nice template to look at for me to add more information rather than just adding sources.

Feedback on draft
Haley: These are detailed and clear additions to the article that also fit well within the article's overall (and somewhat jumbled) original structure. In your first addition, which uses your first source, clarify what the author's point was about women scholar's contributions being seen as less authentic. I wasn't sure what that meant.

Mbrzycki (talk) 19:07, 20 March 2019 (UTC)