User talk:JordanmManson/sandbox

1. First, what does the article-draft do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? Gives good history about finger food to the reader. How she wanted to improve the article impressed me. It gave the reader background of France and finger food.

2. Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic? Everything is on topic and seems necessary in editing the article.

3. Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Explain. The article is neutral and explains the history of finger food. Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic.

4. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?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? The article is unbiased and does not try to pull the reader to a specific side. The sources seem to be from online articles that have self-published authors.

5. Are there any changes you would suggest the author apply to the article? Why? More information added to the paragraph or select a different paragraph to also add information to.

6. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! This article is focused on finger foods while my articles are focused on high fructose corn syrup and sugar sweetened beverages so these articles do not seem to have any connections to one another.

Jordan LavelleTuj14627 (talk) 02:19, 28 October 2019 (UTC)