User talk:RoeJogan712/Web design

Lead
The lead in doesn't need much to be added to it since your additions to the article are fairly specific. However, if you were to edit the lead in, I would suggest including a wikilink to Technical Writing somewhere in the "Often many individuals will work in teams covering different aspects of the design process, although some designers will cover them all. The term "web design" is normally used to describe the design process relating to the front-end (client side) design of a website including writing markup. Web design partially overlaps web engineering in the broader scope of web development. Web designers are expected to have an awareness of usability and be up to date with web accessibility guidelines." section

Tone and Balance
I think that there is some room for improvement in the tone, word choice, and tense of the article. Firstly, you use "we" pronouns a lot in this article. While there is no rule against using personal pronouns, I think that using the term "technical writers" or "web designers" or sometthing of that like will greatly improve the readability of the article.

I also felt that you should switch from present tense to past tense when discussing an article and the methods used therein, as it make sit feel disjointed from the rest of the article.

Also, while I understand why you included it, I think you could remove "The authors do not give clear indication of specific application, however they give a clear and concise framework for effective technical communication", as it takes away from the article somewhat and adds something that could be considered a personal opinion.

Sources and References
Your sources seem reliable to me, though you need to correct your citation for your second reference

Organization
I, personally, am not the biggest fan of bullet points in Wikipedia articles. However I cannot deny their organizational value. Your addition to the article is clear, concise, and easily readable

Overall impressions
Overall, I feel that your addition to the article requires minor tonal and readablility corrections. However, aside from that, your additions feel valid and properly backed up. Logan Picunko (talk) 19:03, 19 October 2023 (UTC)