User talk:KoteyThomas/sandbox

Peer Review: Your section is really good and very sophisticated, so great job. I just found a few things that I have suggestions for as edits (numbered by paragraph): 1. In the first sentence I don't quite understand what "optional protocol" means in the first sentence regarding the topic. 2. As a personal preference I think changing "small portion that skims" instead of "small bit" sounds more smooth. 3. The first sentence is a little confusing and sounds off as I read it (ex: "are numbered"). Other small edits to change: "they're affirming" (in their affirming) & *delete "actually" (in actually necessary) 4. Edits: "not tortured" (instead of "not torture"), "an infringement" (instead of "in infringement") 5. Edits: There is a sentence with "to" typed twice, I am thinking it was supposed to be "but to" Once again I think you have a great section to add to the overall article with a lot of greatly presented information. The only other suggestion I have would be to add links that links to other Wikipedia articles where possible. Kfelder2 (talk) 03:12, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review I agree with the above peer review that your article is really good and it flows really well I also think that you speak with the language that would be within a Wikipedia article. My only suggestion would be to include the points stated above and to also possibly put the OAC in brackets after you mention the full name the first time. Only because I had to read back to try I understand what that acronym meant. Zlee223 (talk) 03:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)zlee223