User talk:Mtovsen/sandbox

Hi there, I see you have selected a few articles for area and sector, but your evaluation section remains incomplete. Check out your peer, Nick Allen's, or my sandbox for an example of how to format your evaluation section. -Momo Sumomox4nouchi (talk) 02:08, 8 February 2019 (UTC)sumomox4nouchi

Peer Review - Shiraz de Vreede Hi Maddy, so far I think your drafting looks great. I feel that your contributions flow well in their respective paragraphs. I especially like the placement of the information you added about female education as well as the child marriages statistics under gender equality. For the first paragraph, I know that the preceding text isn't your work but I think the word "serious" in the first sentence can be changed to "significant" to have a more neutral tone. For the interventions on gender equality, I think your contributions can be strengthened with further examples of the "efforts" to eradicate child marriages and what specifically the UN and other international organizations are doing to support that. Also, your contribution to the Resistance to changing norms section is really solid but I think that the preceding text could use some edits for grammar and possibly citations. Overall, good work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdevreede (talk • contribs) 21:37, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Queenie's peer review
Hi Madisen,

Thank you for being specific on the parts you will add your own words, made it easier for me to know which one is yours and which ones are originally from the Wikipedia articles. For the Gender equality sentences you are adding in this paragraph does not seem to flow well, maybe add yours after the sentence, "Gender-based violence has been reported as another issue". Also this paragraph talks more about inequality rather than equality, so maybe changing the sub heading would be something you could consider doing for this article. For the Female education the sentence you added seem to abrupt when talking about the success of increasing enrollment rate for girls then going to gender discrimination. A sentence or two between these two ideas can help make it flow better. The topic sentence between the two seem to contradict one another.

Your drafting section has little contributions to this point so I wasn't able to help as best as I could. Another suggestion is that when inserting quoted information, discuss the information further with your own words (as Professor Talwalker wanted), because quotation by themselves can be misinterpreted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Queenbook2021 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Responding to Peer Review
I appreciate the suggestions on my drafting, especially to know I'm slightly on the right track. However, as I have recently changed my sector article and research I think this leaves these suggestions somewhat moot. I'm glad Queenie reminded me about inserting direct quotations into the text as well. I will definitely work on ensuring the grammar of the articles and the flow are good from this point on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtovsen (talk • contribs) 19:19, 11 April 2019 (UTC)