User talk:Tgclemons7/sandbox

JM's Peer Review
Two comments on what your individual changes do well:

The reorganization is much better with these edits. The "Issues" section is a serious improvement on the existing entry.

Discussion of the authenticity of digital copies of the text is a crucial one, and improves the entry.

Two comments on what needs improvement:

As an uniformed reader, I would have a question about why the Qur'an is described as a "mushaf." Revise the heading "As a Digital Mushaf" to give a better sense of what the issue is here. Describe the idea behind the Qur'an as a mushaf--what does it mean, and how does that determine how Muslims understand the Q as a digital text? Revise the beginning sentences of that section.

The role that the Qur'an as a digital text plays in how the text is learned in online spaces is a content gap that needs to be filled in this entry. Barrett's edits speak to this, but they are vague and insufficient. I gave Barrett a book called Hashtag Islam and I'd recommend the entire group review it as you improve your work. There is a lot there in terms of discussion that would be useful for your future edits.

Preliminary grade: B Jaclyn-Michael (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)