User talk:Icf17/sandbox/george

Tim's Peer review

Can be found on the following Google Doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DCd9Ja9WaO4yS7VcSZAKqj5gc1m0oHgDBVjhmyw9hl0/edit?usp=sharing

Nick's Peer Review on "George" -- April 15th, 2019

Isabelle does an excellent job of using concise language in order to efficiently convey her points. I did not see any examples of weasel words in her work, which helps the reader to clearly understand where information is coming from and not a vague origin. The only recommendation I will make to the individual sentences is on a grammatical level; there are a few lines that contain erroneous spellings and forgotten words, all of which can be easily corrected on a second draft. Aside from the plot section, each sentence and/or line contains a claim or factual information which are all cited appropriately. Furthermore, Isabelle attributes all claims to their respective author/source in order to avoid misrepresenting work as her own. In addition, the background section she wrote from scratch flows logically and is entirely cohesive, leaving little room for incomprehension. Although we have done some work in class on "George", I do not believe that any of the work Isabelle contributed requires outside knowledge for understanding. In conclusion, Isabelle created an excellent first draft for her contributions and needs only to correct a few minor, grammatical errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Njk47 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)