User talk:LauraStephens435/sandbox

Peer review
Hi, it looks like you have a great start on your sources! I read over your article and had a few suggestions for the peer review:

It seems a few of the sources could be strengthened, I noticed two Huffington Post sources. It looks like you have a jump start on this with your suggested sources though.

Some graphics/pictures could help make the article a little more appealing to the eye.

I noticed there is a space needed between words in the first sentence: "and digital marketing;online" from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_branding

Overall the article seems to not be super neutral, I wonder if this could be addressed of by simply rewording a few phrases? I specifically thought this in the Digital impact on branding section of the article.

I'm sure you already know this, but there are lots of citations missing and big sections of the article that offer not citation to support the information. Adding citations would really help to strengthen the article.

Another suggestion would be to add more examples of digital branding like the Coca-Cola example, perhaps this could help the readers be able to think of real like examples they may have seen online.

I hope these suggestions are helpful and let me know if I missed any changes or ideas you already had posted somewhere else. I'd be happy to look those over as well and offer more suggestions if that would be helpful.

Cookbakelove (talk) 22:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Response: Thanks Cookbakelove for the suggestions! These are all great. It's a little overwhelming to start to edit something like this. I keep getting lost, too, lol.

Great point about the graphics or pictures. It could definitely be improved that way. It isn't super neutral, is it? I did notice it was missing a lot of citations, but since I don't know where the information came from, I wasn't sure what to do with that. I'll also fix that space issue.

I love the idea of adding examples, too. That would be a good way to add some graphics, too.

Thanks again, it helps to have more eyes to review this!

LauraStephens435 (talk) 03:29, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review
Laura, I have read over the article as well as your sources. Great start on adding your sources! I think that will help improve this article immensely. In reading the article, I have noticed that it has large sections that are not cited-- specifically in the "digital impact on branding" paragraph. It looks like it would help to find citations for those pieces of information, or post a comment on the talk page to request that the author of that paragraph add to their citations.

Additionally, this article is relatively precise and short in length. This can be nice as it will allow you to expand on the topic, but also give you the opportunity to create a better visual reference as well. Adding images and graphics can be a great way to improve the look of this article while also creating more references for the readers. I would look for images from public articles or case studies that reference digital branding as a tactic and definition.

With the fact that digital branding is a tactic used by companies and organizations to grow their businesses, I would assume there are a lot of case studies published on this topic by companies. I would definitely search for and reference any case studies of digital branding being used in the marketplace. This will allow your article to create a sense of relevance to its audience.

Overall, I think this article has a great foundation and allows plenty of opportunities for growth. I think if you can narrow down which part you'd like to improve on, that will help you get off and running! Cjsaez (talk) 03:44, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Response: Thanks Cjsaez!

Your suggestions are very helpful! I have been overwhelmed with what to even do with this, especially with all the large sections that have no citation to anything. I will find good sources for that information and post a comment on the Talk page as well. I've not had anyone respond to me so far, so I think I should just go for it.

Good point about it being short in length. That was one of the reasons I picked this article, since I thought I'd be able to make a good bit of improvement.

Thanks again for the suggestions! LauraStephens435 (talk) 03:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Feedback
Your peer reviewers have offered great feedback. Agreed that adding more examples or some images would be a way to add to the article. Or even defining some of the points - For example in the Concept section Creating digital relationships - what is a digital relationship? DrTraceyJHayes (talk) 04:00, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you DrTraceyJHayes! This has been a very different and interesting assignment. It's getting less scary to edit things on here. I do have some great feedback, so I will start to implement those suggestions. Images will definitely be good, and citing and defining some of the points that are missing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LauraStephens435 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 12 October 2020 (UTC)