User talk:Kaifloresb/sandbox

Mihailooo02 (talk) 00:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC)Hey Katia, this is my peer review, what I will do is just split it by the way you have your sections outlined. That way, hopefully, it will be easier for you to follow. I think you did a great job and I definitely learned a lot going over this. However, I do have some feedback that I think will help you do an even better job!

1. ORIGINS AND PURPOSE - So you write "in addition to rooms..." I would rewrite this a little. The way you say it, it sounds like the idea that it has these rooms has already been introduced, but I just found out about it. This is really granular in terms of feedback, but I just think this would sound nicer if it were slightly rewritten. For example, I would say that "The institute included rooms... and then also in addition to them, it included XYZ". I'd just hesitate to start the sentence with "in addition to something that I didn't previously introduce". - At several points you use "they", and I assume you refer to the institute, but I would rather have you say "the Institute" instead of they, because it leaves less room for ambiguity. For example, you talk about the institute having a certain number of guests, and then in the next sentence you say "they advocated for XYZ". The way that I originally interpreted this was that guests advocated for this, because that sentence about guests preceded this sentence. It took me a while to figure out that you actually referred to the institute. I would correct this just to avoid potential ambiguities. - I would rewrite the first sentence of the second paragraph. I would say something along the lines of "Despite sexuality itself being a big focus of the institute, it would be a mistake to claim that this was their only one. The institute focused on many things, like XYZ". I just think it sounds nicer and does a better job of getting your point across!

2. SEXOLOGY AND TRANSEXUALISM - You mention at one point that this one approach the institute has taken was controversial. However, I would ask - for example - what about now? Is it accepted now? Is it still controversial? I think it would benefit your article if you closed this ambiguity with a short sentence. - At one point you mention, I believe, that the success of a transformational sex surgery conducted at the institute lead to an "increase in popularity" of the same. I would perhaps rewrite this and say that it lead to it "gaining more popularity/gaining more traction". I just think it does a slightly better job at getting your point across.

3. POLITICAL WORK - What is Paragraph 175? I know that there is an article linked, but a lot of people will probably not click on it, so I think it would be useful if you elaborated on it with a short sentence. - In one sentence here, you used "included" twice and relatively close to one another, and I think it's redundant and makes your sentence sound worse. I would change the second "included" to instead say "consisted of". Once again this is pretty granular in terms of feedback, but I think it would make your article more semantically pleasing. - What is the Prussian Law? This time there is not even an article linked, so I think it would really benefit your article if you were to elaborate o nthe Prussian Law with a short and concise sentence.

4. NAZIS -You are missing an "is" in your sentence that you contribute here. You say "Lenz said that this [IS] the...". You are missing the "is" haha!

Great job overall!! I really liked the way you stayed neutral, wrote in clear and concise language, and expanded on the article with some really useful and interesting insights. However, I also found it ambiguous at times and slightly aesthetically displeasing at others. I hope that you find some of my feedback useful!

________________________________________________________________________________________

I am super excited about this Wikipedia page. I had never heard of this institute until reading your edits to the page and its so cool. Your edits are really easy to read in comparison to the work already set up so thank you for that. I think one thing you have done really well is rewriting sentences to be more scientific instead of being personal narratives. For example the change from "As well as being a research library and housing a large archive, the Institute also included medical, psychological, and ethnological divisions, and a marriage and sex counseling office" to "In addition to rooms dedicated for medical research and treatment, the Institute contained large library with numerous clinical journals, photographs and documents, and a housing area used by staff, patients, and guests." is beautifully done as it brings the focus on the more important parts of the institute which are the medical aspects, not the library. I also really like the section of sex reassignment surgery. It looks very well researched and supported and it written in an academic manner. Overall I think you are on an amazing track for this Wikipedia page. Maybe you could add more about the specifics of what the treatments were like. Like the specific practices and beliefs the institute tried to pass on to the patients. But you have already done some of that. Can't wait to see the final product. -AES