User talk:Sograves/sandbox3

EVALUATION
06/11/2019 Evaluation by Siarra360 (talk) 00:32, 12 June 2019 (UTC) ==
 * Points: 33/40
 * Grade: 82.5% B-

Spelling/Grammar
Meets standard I read your paper intently and your spelling and grammar seems to be in order. I copy and pasted your submission onto a Microsoft Word Document and ran spell check. There were no errors and I'm impressed with what you wrote on the environmental policies in Norway.

Language
Meets standard You did well with your sentence structures and lengths. You combined sentences using semi-colons and had various lengths. Food for thought: include some scholarly terms that relate to your topic. You've got a very simple explanation that could be improved upon to sound more like an encyclopedia. You do a good job but I'd like to see you flourish and publish this.

Organization
Nearly Meets standard. I'd like to see the last paragraph worked on, with an additional five sentences to complete it. Maybe also add two images for extra meat. I like the structural layout; you followed the guideline well. The header is well-placed. Keep in mind a paragraph should have five- seven sentences to complete it. This is a really long sentence: "The city's climate budget, first launched in 2017 and updated annually, has the city set to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and to reduce its emissions by 95% by 2030." Maybe split that up in to two? Why do you use -- to separate ideas instead of traditional punctuation?

Coding
Meets standard Coding is well-done. The main issue can be with the citing engine and I can see that you completed the prompts right. There are no errors to my knowledge.

Validity
Meets standard. It's riveting to learn about all these environmental initiatives as I am a fan, myself. Your last sentence uses two sources for validity, which is an excellent sign that you did your research. There is a lot of numbers and facts here so I say good job.

Completion
Does not meet standard. Inadequate content. I suggest writing 25-35 additional sentences for this assignment. My math is because five paragraphs with five- seven sentences each =25-35. You wrote 20 sentences so maybe five-15 more. You could add images on green initiatives or cars.

Relevance
Meets Standard Your information is valuable and noteworthy. Over 2 million people used the bike system so that says this information is important to a lot of people, more than just us. Since you did not write too much, it's easy to see why your relevance score is high. The down side to being complete with this assignment is the information has more potential to stray off topic, according to module 4.

06/11/2019 Evaluation by Swiftkick98

 * Points: 32 /40
 * Grade: 80%

Spelling/Grammar
 Nearly meets standard Good use of the original articles spelling, that is a nice touch. I think your sentence structures have a good variety, but maybe try to vary your transitions like "as such" and "as well"

Language
Meets standard I think overall, your tone sounds like an informed encyclopedia, however I would try reworking the first sentence of your second paragraph beginning "The city's climate budget..." because it is a run on sentence. I also appreciate how you've linked some of the things you reference in your paragraphs.

Organization
Meets standard. Your paragraphs have great flow, they are informed and read in a clear concise manner. Nice work

Coding
Meets standard Everything looks formatted well to me, but I'm no expert! All your sources are cited directly after the period, something Dr. Wright commented on mine before, so nice job! The only thing I would say is make sure you have either one space or two (just make sure it is consistent throughout) after your cited sources and the beginnings of the next sentence. One example I see is the sentence "greenpeace ranks oslo as 615..." there needs to be a space or two after the end of that sentence.

Validity
Does not meet standard. Your sources and information look valid and many of them are peer reviewed which is great. You do need 5 more to meet the minimum requirement for this project so I would strive for that before turning in the final (I know you're aware of this, it was posted in the discussion, just needed to put it on this review).

Completion
Does not meet standard. You have well formed paragraphs that are great length. I like that you incorporated around the existing statements about Oslo's environmental endeavor. However, as stated before you are missing 5 sources, so don't forget to add those!

Relevance
Meets Standard All your information is cited, your sources are valid, and you information reads in an easy way. Try maybe breaking up the bulk of your body with an 'enter' here and there to create a new paragraph. Perhaps somewhere in the middle of the last paragraph talking about Oslo and its car/emmission based projects.

6/18/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright
DrMichaelWright (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Much of this is good, and will be a welcome addition to Wikipedia if you want to make it so. However, I do have some suggestions for improvement below.
 * Points: 37/40
 * Grade: 92.5%

Spelling/Grammar
Meets standard.

Language
Meets standard.
 * The language is on the verge of being 'cheerleadery'.

Organization
Meets standard.
 * It might be appropriate to list the prizes after mentioning the policies that won Oslo those prizes.

Coding
Meets standard.

Validity
Meets standard.

Completion
Meets standard. You have enough raw text.

Relevance
Meets standard.