User talk:Sgeld002/sandbox

I really like all the details you added. Very interesting subject area. I had no idea about the subject and it was very interesting to learn something new. Not really familiar with the area you chose but the line you added "The brutal way Caster Semenya's gender verification case was treated ignite an ethical aspect to the track & field sport.[2]" Sounds like it has a little biased words. Might need to reword a few words so that it sounds more neutral, other than that, Excellent. LuzRaudales (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2019 (UTC)Luz Raudales

Peer Review for Sex Verification in Sports - Alejandra
Hi Sophie! Great topic! I think these controversial topics are the hardest to address because they have to be very neutral, but I think that you did that just fine! I'll go through the points to evaluate:

Your lead section is easy to understand, apart from that you have a clear structure, you demonstrated the parts that you wanted to change and italicized them. Very clear and organized. The balanced coverage is on point, you added a section that highlighted the new regulations as of 11/01/2018. Your article seems very neutral to me, very scientific. You chose great and reliable sources, they are from the IAAF and then another one from the Journal of Medical Ethics.

The topic is very important because I am beginning to hear about this more and more in the news. I think that you addressed the most important point on the article. Additionally, I think that this is a very interesting topic, ethically it has a lot to offer.

Your sections are organized well, in a sensible order.

I also think that you stayed right on point, nothing off topic, and everything ties in pretty well. However, I would not be able to tell if there are things missing on this topic.

I could not guess the perspective of the author by reading the article.

All of your edits seem very neutral in context and no sentence seems to be giving your personal opinion nor trying to prove a point one way or another.

You have reliable sources, although there are two sources.

Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately! I'm not sure about this.

To sum up, this topic is very controversial and prejudiced against female athletes to some extent. I like the scientific nature of the article and what defines sex testing. I think you did a great job in balancing all the content. The only thing I would suggest would be to maybe add another source, just to get more perspectives. --Arodr1334 (talk) 00:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Prof R Feedback
i'm a bit confused...i see the underlined/italicized bits that you are adding but the "ethics" section is empty? Micalva (talk) 03:37, 17 April 2019 (UTC)