User talk:Joan Bailey/sandbox

Name of student reviewer: Alyssa Bhagwandin

Date of review: 05/15/13

Name of editor: Paula Guthrie

URL of editor’s Userpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Joan_Bailey/sandbox

Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page: 05/15/13

Date review submitted to instructor: 05/15/13

Length of edit (too long/too short): I think it was a good length it wasn’t too short or long, and the bulletin points have it some length

Image (needed/appropriate): No image needed

Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit): Yes used text book information

Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed: Yes used an article

Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych): Yes, adherent to I/O psychology

Wikiformatting: The format was following wikiformatting

Grammar & composition: Grammar and composition was good

Other comments: Over all good job, the topic was interesting as well.

User:A_Bhagwandin (talk)

Name of student reviewer: Savitrie Rampersaud

Date of review: 05/07/13

Name of editor: Paula Guthrie

URL of editor’s Userpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Joan_Bailey/sandbox

Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page: 05/07/13

Date review submitted to instructor: 05/07/13

Length of edit (too long/too short): too long

Image (needed/appropriate): N/A

Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit): Yes

Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed: Yes

Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych): Yes

Wikiformatting:

Grammar & composition: Good grammar and composition

Other comments: Good Job

........................................................ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.145.34 (talk) 01:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Name of student reviewer: Jasmine R Basnight

Date of review: 05/06/13

Name of editor: Paula Guthrie

URL of editor’s Userpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Joan_Bailey/sandbox

Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page: 05/06/13

Date review submitted to instructor: 05/06/13

Length of edit (too long/too short): The edit was a great length

Image (needed/appropriate): N/A

Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit): Yes

Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed: Yes

Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych): Yes

Wikiformatting: bullets and numerical, list form

Grammar & composition: Good grammar and composition

Other comments: Great job!

{| class="wikitable"

! Name of student reviewer !! Wikipedia User:Nikicia
 * Date of review || May 7,2013
 * Name of editor**Replace with username for version on talk page**|| Wikipedia User:Joan Bailey
 * URL of editor’s Userpage || http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Joan_Bailey/sandbox
 * Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page || May 7, 2013
 * Date review submitted to instructor || May 7, 2013
 * Length of edit (too long/too short) || Length is good
 * Image (needed/appropriate) || Image not needed
 * Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) || Information is accurate
 * Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed || Yes
 * Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) || Good
 * Wikiformatting || Good formatting
 * Grammar & composition || Very minor spelling errors
 * Other comments|| Great Job Nikicia (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Image (needed/appropriate) || Image not needed
 * Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) || Information is accurate
 * Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed || Yes
 * Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) || Good
 * Wikiformatting || Good formatting
 * Grammar & composition || Very minor spelling errors
 * Other comments|| Great Job Nikicia (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikiformatting || Good formatting
 * Grammar & composition || Very minor spelling errors
 * Other comments|| Great Job Nikicia (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Grammar & composition || Very minor spelling errors
 * Other comments|| Great Job Nikicia (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Other comments|| Great Job Nikicia (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback
Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

Name of student reviewer: Aisha Hamid

Date of review: 5/9/2013

Name of editor: Joan Bailey

URL of editor’s Userpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Joan_Bailey/sandbox

Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page: 5/9/2013

Date review submitted to instructor: 5/9/2013

Length of edit (too long/too short): The length of the edit is lengthy, but you have provided a great amount of material. Image (needed/appropriate): N/A Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit): You have cited two things under your edit. But you didn’t provide page numbers. But it is very relevant to the text. (But should put page numbers)

Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed: Along with the use of the text for your turnover article you also provided an article and yes it does fill all the criteria. Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych): Yes the information is accurate to I/O.

Wikiformatting: Excellent formatting, I think has been the best formatting I have seen from all the ones I have edited.

Grammar & composition: Found no errors.

Other comments: Over all great edit, Good Luck

Aisha Hamid (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)