User talk:Jessehersh/sandbox

What the article did well
A couple of sections like the second paragraph of public relations and the Names section under Literary Elements were really well-written. The sources were synthesized well, and it didn't seem biased or unbalanced.

Changes I would suggest
Perhaps consider adding onto the Literary elements section more and tweaking the Fairy tale part of it. That part seemed to me more like it was focusing on plot than how Eyla's story functioned as a literary element, and that section needs to be grounded better in your references. Also, there are a couple of grammar mistakes in the article, like one three sentences into the Fairy Tale section that starts with "Eyla is must..." Proofread to make sure you catch everything.

Most important change to make
Just make sure your references are cited properly so that everything you have written has credibility and won't be striked for plagiarism.

What can I apply to my own article
I am also working on a themes/literary elements section. Some of my sections only have two sentences, and after reading your guys', I think I should add more.

Kevin's peer review
1. It introduced the novel in a very detailed way, including well-explained plots. it is very interesting that this page includes literary elements which impresses me and provokes my curiosity towards the book. 2. I think the most important change for this article is to add characters' names in plot section. The lack of names may cause indifferent feeling of readers. Because they would think "Ok, these are some random guys popping out everywhere." They would be one step away from entering the door of story; they would not be in the story. 3. I have learnt the simplicity of language from this article. As a Wikipedia article, simple and accurate language would be more efficient to express the article.

= Noelle Canty, Peer Review for Jesse Hersh's Sandbox = Hi, peers: Some advice follows. Thank you for considering it. Format/genre: See footnote 6 for a capitalization issue in the journal title. In the Public Reception section, should you reference a source for sentences three, four, and five? The phrase "fair bit" in the Fairy Tales section seems informal. In the Names section, are you, or is a critic claiming that names form "an important theme"? Should you reference authors at the ends of the first three sentences? The second-to-last section in the Fairy Tales section contains a subject disagreement: "protagonists" and "him." Prose: The writing seems indirect. More explanations of elements of the story might help to elucidate the writing. Verifiability: The sources could be better synthesized when the article is more developed. As a reader, I am interested in learning about the "tale of Elya Yelnats," "the mountain stream," "Madame Zeroni's song," and the "healing power of the onions" in the Fairy Tales section. How does the tale relate to the actual protagonist and main story of the novel Holes? Why are the three magical things magic? What do they do? Are they prominent enough in Holes to justify a place in the Themes section? I think you could write a Themes section which elaborates on Fairy Tales and Names. You could add sections such as Labor, Irony, History, Identity, Escapism, and Didacticism. Notability: The main advice which I might give is to improve directness by adding more sources and explanations of the plot of the story. The plot seems confusing and the sources analyze it. Explaining both the plot and sources thoroughly can bring you up to the word count and help you to develop the writing more. 688GlRv (talk) 18:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)