User talk:Llada75/Reading comprehension

Comments/ suggestions for the article you are improving based on your most recent edits.

My suggestions mainly pertain to organization

Areas of strength
 * Move the definition section. Incorporate this section into the very beginning part of the article that is currently unlabeled instead of having it by itself. Its current placement just creates confusion and repetition. Once that's been completed, label the beginning part of the article the definition of reading comprehension. This will assist in making the article clearer.
 * Combine the overview and history section. They appear to share similarly related information. This will assist in reducing confusion because the sections will not be separated. Readers will not have to renavigate the content.
 * Label the vocabulary section differently. Its current title is misleading. It implies it is going to discusses reading comprehension vocabulary not how vocabulary is related to reading comprehension.

Camiadmire (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Citations. This article contains numerous citations to be able to locate information.
 * Content. This article contains a high volume of information. One can tell the topic was well-researched.
 * Examples. This article provides a wide variety of strategies associated with reading comprehension. Readers can understand how it is implemented.


 * I too added a peer review to this wikipage, however it was for Bee217hardcore, and I am unsure why it is not coming up when I hit peer review and sandbox. So I am not sure if you changed your username or if it is a glitch in the system. Kcj475 (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2023 (UTC)