User talk:RPolls

Welcome!
Hello, RPolls, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Brianda and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

You have an overdue training assignment.
Please complete the assigned training modules. --Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review (04/03/23)
The article is slightly underdeveloped, though what needs the most improvement might be the reorganization. The section titled “Research” includes much more than just research; in fact, the section also includes information on women’s representation in politics and intersectionality (specific to race; no research behind it). Keeping “Research” as a section is fine, though it should be focused on specific lab studies/surveys/field work on guyanese women. Perhaps elaborate on who framed the women as “deviant, disintegrated…” and why it’s significant that these specific people did it. Frankly, all of what is on a Wikipedia page must be backed up by sources, which likely include research; thus, unless the “Research” section becomes specific enough to only research, maybe focus on developing other/more sections.

There are some moments in the article where statements are not cited when they should be (refer to peer review form). Also, proofread thoroughly as there are some grammatical errors that might have been too small to catch at quick glance. No *additional* images were included in the article. Given that a decent chunk of what was added (in boldface and underlined) is under “History,” maybe finding an image for that section is a good start.

The statements/sections added are a strong start! The best next step could be to create a stronger, more cohesive outline in which sections flow well from one to the other. Best of luck! Lorenlacruz (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I really really liked reading your contributions to the article! Whenever I was editing an existing article for mine, I think I struggled with strengthening the work that was already there, but you did such a great job of elevating the sections that you didn’t make from scratch, and I think it added another dimension of improvement to the article as a whole! Your strengths were definitely your diction, word choice, and organization. I especially liked your contributions to the research section; the sentence about the ‘historical displacement and stereotypical frameworks’ embedded into the history of women’s representation in Guyana was enlightening, and really helped me understand the circumstances that facilitated the underrepresentation of women in the public spheres. In terms of improvement, I think my only suggestion would be to consider adding a concluding section about the current state of women’s representation in Guyana, or just an overview of how women’s social status has changed over time; I know you talked about it a lot in each section, but having it all condensed in one place that brings it into modern context might be helpful too! Aside from that suggestion, I feel like your article was pretty complete! I can’t wait to read it once it’s all tied in with the original work, I think your edits and contributions are really powerful! Jordynederer (talk) 04:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)Jordyn Ederer (Jordynederer (talk) 04:59, 1 April 2023 (UTC))