User talk:Nishaa19/sandbox

Hi Nishaa19, Here are my comments on your article evaluation:


 * I thought it was interesting that you thought that some of the newspaper articles were not neutral. Why  did you think this?
 * You chose an interesting and active article to review, even though it is C-class it seems like there was a fair amount of activity on the talk page.

Groceryheist (talk) 17:57, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Marisa's Peer Review
The contributions you made to the Everlane page were great.They're all notable and I especially like the section you did on brand vision, it was very informative. All of the information provided was neutral and notable. The only question I have is where these new additions are going. Will they be in their own section or apart of an existing section? You can also add links to a lot of the other notable things you mentioned, like Buzzfeed and the CEO of Everlane. Good job!Marisalobo96 (talk) 00:37, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review by Alia
Hi Nisha!

I really enjoyed reading through your article and thought the information went pretty in-depth. Your sources all seem credible, and you have a fair number of them as well which is great. There were a few things however that I thought you might want to take a look at. For example, I would be more concise in your wording, so maybe getting rid of filler words like "Everlane's brand vision follows the founder's vision of a clothing brand that is committed to 'radical transparency'" and change it to "Everlane's brand vision is a clothing line committed to 'radical transparency'" and adding in "The" to "Founder and CEO" - "The Founder and CEO". Additionally, you might want to link Michael Preysman's wiki since he is the CEO (if he has a Wikipedia page). To create a more encyclopedic tone, try and get rid of adjectives such as "great" and "ambitious". "Preysman told GQ over email that "the global supply chain is taxing our planet and we need to change the system if we want the planet to have a future."

I would get rid of the sentence above or paraphrase it, otherwise it might be considered as plagiarism since you don't quote the entire sentence. I would also be careful of phrasing since Wikipedia seems to be pretty strict on rules of plagiarism, so try not to copy large chunks of a sentence from the article into your writing. Overall, your information and content was really interesting. Great job! Alialm97 (talk) 04:52, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Feedback on article draft
Hi, I'm happy to see this nice progress on your article! The others left you some really awesome feedback already! I would reiterate that it's important to try to have an encyclopedic tone and neutral point of view and to avoid too many overly long quotes (some quotes are definitely OK, so feel free to use your judgement. The great thing about Wikipedia is if you don't do something perfect, someone else can come along and fix it.

I encourage you to polish your article a bit, with a focus on writing style and clarity. I don't see any particular problems there, its just something that can always be improved. Finally, I think it would be great to add some more Wikilinks to your article. Wikilinks can be a good way to help other editors discover your article. After you publish your article, you might also consider linking to your article from other relevant articles. You should also add your article to any relevant categories. Groceryheist (talk) 01:24, 6 February 2019 (UTC)