User talk:LadyLessa/sandbox

Comments
This is a good first draft, LadyLessa. I like how you have found a way to contribute multiple linked articles, and to connect the broader history of charity to a provincial organization.

A few areas for improvement:

I would like to see more detail of the history of Variety. It isn't really encyclopedic to say that it "eventually morphed" into what it is today; more detail is needed.

I think in your History of Charity article you need a subheading directing readers to the main article on Charity.

I noticed you lapsing into a bit of editorial writing -- for example, "Sadly, he was unable to..." In encyclopedic style, the "sadly" has no place, unless you can site a source that says that many people were sad - a newspaper article, perhaps? "Many were sad when longtime host..." See the difference?

Overall, consider the structure of the Variety of BC article. I think the Purpose should be near the top, before the history sections. Consider putting the history of charity first, and then the history of Variety - I think it makes more sense chronologically. Fundraising could stay at the end, as it's more contemporary in content.

Peer-edits
I've noted an awkward sentence and fixed a few tense problems. Your article is very interesting. Not a lot of changes were needed. Be careful to stay neutral in your writing.

Crankymom (talk) 03:47, 1 April 2016 (UTC)