User talk:Katiej2727!/sandbox

'''Does the introductory sentence state the article topic concisely and accurately in a single sentence? If not, how might the writer revise her introductory sentence?''' Yes, the introductory sentence gives the statement of Betches being a "digital brand" and naming the creators.

'''Does the lead section summarize all major points in the article? If not, what's missing?''' Yes, the lead section gives a brief summary of what the entire article will be about. It mentions the main points of the multiple platforms this site uses and books that have been written and it is very concise.

'''Is the information included in the summary also present in the body of the article? If not, what needs to be removed from the summary?''' Yes, the lead section mentions the main website, social media accounts, a podcast, their online shopping site, and the creation of their two books. All of these businesses can be found later on in the article in greater detail under their own subheadings.

'''Are the topics well organized and divided by headings and subheadings? Does the article cover the topic in organized, logical fashion? If not, how might the author consider revising the article to improve the organization?''' Yes, each topic is well organized and divided into headings and subheadings. The order of the topics is really good too beginning with the origin and history of the site and ending with the most recent issues that have come up about the site.

'''Has the author added sections that cover the topic more broadly and fill some existing gaps? If so what are those additions? What else might be added?''' Yes, the author added the sections of the multiple platforms this site has reached as well as the two books that were published in 2013 and 2016.

'''What smaller additions has the author added to relevant sections of the article? What else should the author consider adding or changing?''' Just a suggestion I think the education portion should be included in the origin or history paragraph instead of just have those few sentences under a separate subheading.

'''Is the coverage of the topic balanced? Where does the author present information in a tone appropriate for an encyclopedia? Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article?''' The article seems to be very balanced. The phrases used are very neutral in tone and there is no point where the author steers more towards one perspective.

'''Is every statement associated with a supporting reference? If not, mark the statements that are missing supporting references.''' I suggest supporting the statement of each of the co-creators having family members that specialize in business and law that really helped them build up their company. I would also include a reference to the site you mention named Digital America.Marissa cuevas (talk) 23:05, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review - Kip Ambrose
Does the introductory sentence state the article topic concisely and accurately in a single sentence? If not, how might the writer revise her introductory sentence? Yes! The topic sentence/paragraph does display the rest of the article very well, as it states what Betches is and how it was created, as well as what it has grown into today. Does the lead section summarize all major points in the article? If not, what's missing? Yes! It has all the information on the subheadings that you include throughout the article. It sets the rest of the article up very well.

Is the information included in the summary also present in the body of the article? If not, what needs to be removed from the summary? It covers all the subheadings for the rest of the article without going into too much detail, which is good. Overall, the lead paragraph does a great job of summarizing what the rest of the article is about without being too long and wordy. I wouldn’t change a thing about the opening paragraph!

Are the topics well organized and divided by headings and subheadings? Does the article cover the topic in organized, logical fashion? If not, how might the author consider revising the article to improve the organization? One of the subheadings, “Education”, is not in the same format as the other subheadings. Also, “Origins” and “History” are very similar, so you might want to think about combining those two sections or taking some things from one section and creating a new one.

Has the author added sections that cover the topic more broadly and fill some existing gaps? If so what are those additions? What else might be added? I wasn’t sure what gaps were there before, so it’s hard to answer this question, but it seems like you cover most everything about Betches, from the history to the owners to what they actually do.

What smaller additions has the author added to relevant sections of the article? What else should the author consider adding or changing? I see that you have about 40 references, which is amazing, so I can tell that you’ve added a lot to the article and really done your research. I would maybe add something about where the owners plan to take it. Have they said anything in interviews about it or have been quoted in an article talking about where they want to take Betches in the future?

Is the coverage of the topic balanced? Where does the author present information in a tone appropriate for an encyclopedia? Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? The tone of the article is very good and sounds professional and perfect for Wikipedia. There is no bias that I could detect while reading it which adds credibility! I would just make sure to vary the way that you start your sentences, as it can get somewhat repetitive at certain points. There were just a few grammatical errors too but nothing too crazy!

Is every statement associated with a supporting reference? If not, mark the statements that are missing supporting references. With 40 references, you are doing an amazing job of finding good, reliable sources and utilizing them well! Overall, this article is very professional and is great! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KipAmbrose12 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)