User talk:Rgbuttenhoff5565/sandbox

Gage McFarland's peer review
Reviewing: The Lewiston Morning Tribune sandbox

A. The lead accurately displays what the article is about. B. The lead does give us a sample of what the main sections are about. C. The lead does reflect new information added by the group. D. The lead is mostly concise, it could do without the “first newspaper in Idaho to publish an electronic addition”

A. The content added is relevant to the topic and does not stray from the main topic at hand. B. According to their sources used, the content is accurate and up to date. C. For this checkpoint, it is not missing any information, which I do assume more will be added in the future.

A. The content is presented in a neutral, unbiased tone. B. No biased opinions or points of view are presented. C. No points of views are presented, only a neutral tone that is represented well.

A. Most of the sources seem to be of a reliable, unbiased, .org or .edu site, not including the homepage of The Lewiston Morning Tribune. B. Most of the sources are thorough. C. The sources are current and updated. D. Most of the links work, I did find one that present a “404” error on the UoI website.

A. The content is well-written and easy to read. B. There appear to be no grammatical errors within the content presented. C. The content is broken up into subsections and is simple and easy to follow.

N/A (No other media displayed)

The content has definitely improved the overall being of the article, which still needs more subsections, but of course I know that will be added on later. I think the info should be only a little more spread out, whether it being more subsections, or larger subsection titles. I feel not much is needed in order to improve the quality of the article, which to improve quantity will come later.

Overall, this is a sound article then does not need much work done to it. MisterGrumpy (talk) 20:44, 7 November 2019 (UTC)Gage McFarland

Maria's peer review:
On the edited version of the article Lewiston Morning Tribune, we can find information on the founder of the article, the year published and what it offers. Serving central and southeastern Idaho, The Lewiston Morning Tribune can also be found in Amazon Kindle. After being locally owned for 89 years, two thirds of the stock was sold to Newspapers of Denver. Overall, the article was very neutral and did not present bias in any way. The sources used to support your statement were helpful and reliable. I personally checked the links to the websites and they worked fine. You could add more context to this by stating if it is still active, how many newspapers are printed out daily, and who is a member of this Tribune. 74.118.22.224 (talk) Maria Jimenez —Preceding undated comment added 21:14, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Alec Holmes Peer Review
1. The lead section includes an introductory sentence that explains what their topic is. The lead does include a brief description of what the article is about. It has been updated by the group for present day and the new content that has been added over the years. I believe the lead is concise and to the point. It does not beat around the bush nor does it go on too long. 2.The content they have provided is relevant and up to date related to the topic. I can not think of any content that is missing or is needing to be added. 3.The point of view they used was neutral and in a non bias way. There are not any claims that seem underpresented or overpresented. They have equal info for all tabs of their article. 4. All of the sources they used are reliable and credible from what I have seen. The sources are also thorough and not out of date. 5. The overall article so far is well written and concise. Also the grammar is very solid with no errors. The content is well organized with being split into sections that reflect the major points of the topic. 6. N/A 7. The content added has substantially improved from the other wikipedia article. The strengths of this article are the current facts that are not outdated and the grammar is solid. Overall it is a well put together article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.87.253.165 (talk) 04:05, 15 November 2019 (UTC)