User talk:Melmoore94/sandbox

Peer Review Notes
-“Considerable promise” is a subjective term.

-“she published her first poem at age seven, her first story at 12”. Different writing formats have different rules for when to use the numbers’ names and when to use the numerals, MLA and APA are different, and this is sentence is technically correct, under APA format, so maybe it’s just me being used to MLA style, but it just feels off, reading seven and 12 back to back, particularly when the word twelve is literally only one letter longer than the word seven.

-When you list the various magazines and newspapers she has written for, some are linked, and some are not. This feels inconsistent. Now, this may not be your fault, I don’t know if Wikipedia articles exist for the unlinked titles or not, but if they do, I would try to link them in.

-“skilled writer” and “talented artist” come off as being subjective, opinion-based observations. Perhaps accomplished, or recognized would be better words? I don’t know, I’m just nit-picking for the sake of the peer-review assignment now.

-“came down with Typhus and upon healing she became plagued with sore throats…”, the use of the word healing in this context is grammatically incorrect. Recover would be the obvious replacement. However, I get the clear sense that you are attempting to alter the wording from a source, I feel as though the original writing used the word recover, and you changed it to heal to avoid plagiarism. Ideally, the reader wouldn’t be able to notice such a change. Maybe “recuperated”? There’s only so much we can do with the English language, but I feel like there are still ways to alter the original wording while maintaining grammatical coherence.

-The book titles My Brother's Wife and Barbara's History are both italicized, but the title “The Phantom Coach” is in quotations. Is this inconsistency intentional? Are some novels and some short stories or poems? Or was this a mistake made by multiple people editing the same paragraph? Either way, some correction and/or clarification may be helpful.

Generally speaking, the article exerts that you are editing are well written and informative. Notice how most of my notes have to do with grammar. It seems clear to me that you have a clear path in front of you and you know exactly what direction you are planning on taking the article. Great start, keep it up. The only other major concern that comes to my mind is how you plan on fitting these additions into the existing article. Organization of information may be the biggest challenge ahead of you. Rkosi (talk) 01:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)