User talk:Jdb337

Welcome
Hello, Jdb337 and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are participating in a class project. If you haven't done so already, we encourage you to go through our training for students.

If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Please also read this helpful advice for students.

Before you create an article, make sure you understand what kind of articles are accepted here. Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and while many topics are encyclopedic, some things are not.

Your instructor or professor may wish to set up a course page, and if your class doesn't already have one please tell your instructor about that. It is highly recommended that you place this text:  on the talk page of any articles you are working on as part of your Wikipedia-related course assignment. This will let other editors know this article is a subject of an educational assignment and aid your communication with them.

We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay even after your assignment is finished! GABgab 17:27, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, Jdb337, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Edits to "Native American mascot controversy"
While appreciating that all articles may be improved, after review I have reverted two of your edits while making minor revisions to the same content.

This article passed a review to become a Good article last year. This means that its completeness and neutrality was deemed worthy of that status. In your sandbox comments, several references were made to the lack of coverage of arguments in favor of using Native American mascots. In WP articles neutrality means giving appropriate weight to content from reliable sources, not giving equal treatment to each side in a controversy. The case against Native mascots is made by psychologists, sociologists, and other experts, most published in peer-reviewed journal articles and books. The opinions in support of retaining Native mascots are made by a very small number of journalists (compared to the dozens of journalists who agree with the academic consensus), team owners and management, and fans of the teams, all published in mass-media sources. The current balance of viewpoints has been deemed appropriate, and to do otherwise would be a False balance. -WriterArtistDC (talk) 01:23, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Hannah's Peer Review
Hannahso608 (talk) 18:19, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

The language that you use is concise, and easy to understand. I feel that the sentence "In response to backlash for portraying gay characters in a children's book, Telgemeier responded by saying that when an individual is young sexuality may not play a major role in their lives, but it always remains a part of their identity and that she doesn't attempt to force her viewpoints on anyone" may be a bit long, and can perhaps be broken up into two sentences instead. The part about Telgemeier's refusal to force her viewpoints can be included in a separate sentence.

The only weasel words that I found are in the sentence "Drama has received largely positive reviews by book critics throughout the years," which I would consider deleting altogether, since the next few sentences mention all the awards that Drama has won, which conveys that Drama has been critically acclaimed.

I would include a citation for the sentence "However, the details regarding the ban [at Chapel Hill Elementary School] are limited since there was no coverage on it." For the Washington Post article, maybe check to see if the library has access to the article? Otherwise, all the sentences are well-cited, and signal phrases are well-used.

The content that you added flows logically and makes sense.

For a more formal tone, I would remove the contraction from the sentence, "In response to backlash for portraying gay characters in a children's book, Telgemeier responded by saying that when an individual is young sexuality may not play a major role in their lives, but it always remains a part of their identity and that she doesn't attempt to force her viewpoints on anyone."