User talk:Mconr1/sandbox

The information given is very unbiased and strong, it stays on neutral ground and gives the information without predisposition to a bias. Citations are properly formatted but consider citing a second source to reinforce your added sentences. Also make sure to continuously keep up with citing your source at the end of each of your edited sentences, even if the source is the same, if the information is in different sections of the article it's best to cite it back to the source. Changes are substantial and well researched, including citations and added information to missing sections of the article at hand. Edits are clear and worded well, and include fixing sentence structure to make it more clear than previously shown in article. Opeco1 (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC) Peer Review Response After reading what Olivia had to say about my sandbox and the edits that I plan to make, there are a few things that I am going to do. She mentioned citing another source so that I can almost fact check my own writing. I will add another source, and maybe add another edit with that source, or change one of the sentences that I already created with that source. This way, I can make sure to have multiple sources so that future editors or readers of my edits do not think that I am biased due to the fact that I only have one source. Some of the sentences that I created were just small structural changes to what was already there, so I will not add citations to every edit I made like Olivia recommended. Because there is no information from a source, and it is common knowledge that was already in the article, the citations for those edits are not needed. I will use her feedback constructively to make my edits the best they can be.