User talk:Ndo8/sandbox

Peer Review
1.	The article is very organized, which makes it very easy to see exactly what the changes are. I was really impressed with the first draft, it is very professional and gives a lot of good information that seems to add a lot to the actual Wiki article. I also really agreed with and enjoyed the idea to make it clear when one thought ends and a new one begins. Without clear headlines or subject changes, it can be difficult to tell when one part of the article ends and another begins, which happens many times in Wiki articles. I think it is great that they identified this and are planning to improve it. A small change like this can really make a large difference in both the appeal and the understanding of the article. 2.	I would start adding more examples that are more recent into the article. Recent examples give the article more meaning and make it easier for the reader to relate and understand. Without recent examples, the article seems outdated and harder to believe compared to an article that has up-to-date examples. It can also generate more interest in the topic itself. You also could possibly discuss how these American jury trials compare to trials around the world. Obviously that is not what the article is about, so you would not need to add this, but it could improve the article. I feel this change would make the article more interesting and give it more information at the same time. 3.	I believe that the most important thing the author could do to improve this article would be to add in the recent examples. That is really necessary to improve the article, make it easier to understand, and generally to bring it up to date. This is a topic that can change throughout the years and it is also a topic that can have extremely recent examples, so I believe that is definitely the most important change that would need to be made. Alyssadicker (talk) 16:03, 30 March 2018 (UTC)