User talk:Lizziemcguirein2018/sandbox

Liz! Great article! David (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review for Barbara Simons Article
Great outline for changes so far! The current lead section definitely needs some work, though I'd be careful to avoid making it too lengthy; only summarize the most essential information. I like your suggested reorganization of the "Life and Career" section, assuming that you have enough information to make each section substantial, especially considering that there are no citations for that section currently. Your list of sources looks good, though I'm not certain you can directly use Broken Ballots as a reference since it is written by the subject. Overall, your plan looks good so far, but it would be easier to critique if you had some intended edits pasted in your sandbox already. JackRubenacker (talk) 07:14, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review for Barbara Simons' article
After reading your draft, I think you're off to a good start! Everything seemed very relevant to the article topic. When writing about a person, especially one we've heard speak in class, it may be hard to stay neutral. So far, it seems unbiased just make sure the actual article is like that too.

Also you linked "Association for Computational Machinery" to a Wiki article just like you did for Douglas W. Jones except there is no article on that so it doesn't really link to anything. By that did you mean "Association for Computing Machinery" because that does exist. All the other links look fine.

Each fact should have an appropriate reference, so make sure you cite after every fact and not just have the bibliography at the end. Also, when you're using information from Simon's book be sure to mention the bias so the readers are aware the source is not neutral but Simons herself.

Other than that, you have a good amount of things you want to add and I'm sure the content will be enough! Great job! Ahiredits (talk) 15:47, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

=Danny's Peer Edit Review of Lizzie's First Draft Article= Hello Lizzie! I like what you've done so far! It looks like you have good ideas to further lengthen the article which is great. I'm just concerned about the flag that is currently up. Wondering if your main focus should be verifying the current information, deleting unverifiable, citing the verifiable, and then adding your personal changes. I think the primary concern is getting that flag removed by the user who placed it there. I wish you the best of luck and have a good spring break! Dannyticknor (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2018 (UTC)