User talk:Jamiej199722/sandbox

Tiffany's peer review.
Do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic? Yes Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information? Yes Does the lead give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Is anything missing? Is anything redundant? The edit feels pretty well balanced with the rest of the article. Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)?Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic? These section are well organized in a sensible order. The section’s lengths are equal to the importance of the article’s subject. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? The article tells information about K-Dramas. The article is not bias, but informs. Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." No Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? They are from a reliable source. First, what does the article do well? The article introduces what K-Drama is and the background. The section does well to inform. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Yes, author has edits and list of things that need to be added and changed. Over all, I think this was a good edit. It explains what K-drama is and the importance of the changes that are happening with in the dramas and socially within the country.

Response to Tiffany's Peer Review
Hello Tiffany,

Thank you for reviewing our draft! We are glad to see that our edits adhere to Wikipedia standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiej199722 (talk • contribs) 04:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)