User talk:Rlhamm/sandbox

Peer Review
1.    Does the introduction section in the entry provide you with a basic knowledge of the theory or concept? What could be improved in this section?
 * I think your addition of social media influencers is incredibly relevant and will make an impact for the article.
 * In the body of your introduction, the sentence "feel as though a mediated other is talking directly to them," might just be redundant of the sentence following that references verbal and nonverbal mechanisms. Maybe use "directly communicating to give it a better understanding?

2.   What are the strengths of the content sections? Talk about the organization, flow, and what you learned from these sections.
 * I really think your addition of the Social Media Advertising was very interesting and well written. This type of advertising seems to be all I see anymore, but then again I think that exposes my time on social media. I would consider removing Katy Perry as a reference, due to how long is that going to be relevant, maybe just make reference to the most "followed" celebrities.

3.   What are the weaknesses in the content sections? What can the author do to improve these sections? Make sure to offer specific sections.
 * I did notice in looking through the Parasocial wiki site, within the Body image content section, that there are references made to research and studies being completed, but none of these studies have been cited. I know that you did not write or re-write that section, but it might be worth finding the information and citing it correctly.

4.   Does the “application” section make sense? What is lacking and how can it be improved?
 * I only see the "See Also" section pointing me to other areas of similar interest.

5.   Does the “critique” section offer a substantive critique of the theory or concept? What suggestions do you have to improve this section?
 * The future research section does a great job of defining areas for growth and research for this topics. Otherwise, I do not see a label for "critique"

6.   Discuss any issues with grammar, sentence structure, or other writing conventions.
 * I would ensure that you're not using too many quotes, as to ensure Wiki doesn't find fault with the information you've shared, given their strict plagiarism rule.

All in all, I think you did a great job! JRMcCumber1 (talk) 08:05, 30 June 2018 (UTC)