User talk:Maiyabarker/sandbox

1. First, what does the article-draft do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? I feel as though the draft for all three articles held a good amount of information while being straight to the point.

2. Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic? Each draft is on topic and holds viable information.

3. Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Explain. No, there feels to be no bias in any of these drafts, but maybe refrain from stating "it is interesting" in the fingerfood draft.

Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic.

4. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? Each statement has a citation, and again there seems to be no bias.

5. Are there any changes you would suggest the author apply to the article? Why? No, the amount of information provided is nice.

6. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! Yes, I enjoy the way your sandbox is organized. 7. Write your name followed up by "Cassie Swackhamer (talk) 00:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)" CassieCassie Swackhamer (talk) 00:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)