User talk:TheDockterisin/sandbox3

Evaluation by Harlie40Hands (talk) 12:51, 03 December 2018 (UTC)
Spelling/Grammar Meets Expectations: Good, I noticed a period is missing after your first and second quotes in the second paragraph, and an apostrophe in Parliament's near the end of the piece.

Language Meets Expectations: Entirely professional language.

Organization Meets Expectations: stays on topic and has a rational flow.

Coding Somewhat Meets Expectations: Good. As Grace mentioned, context provided by links or further explanation in the text is necessary.

Validity Somewhat Meets Expectations: "Devolved" politics seems to be an important thread in your edit, but there is nothing in the paragraph to tell the reader what you mean by that, or a link to a page that would explain it.

Completion Meets Expectations: I don't know if you met the paragraph requirement, but you have a lot of info in your two paragraphs and a full 20 sources.

Relevance Exceeds Expectations: You provide helpful details that highly contribute to the original article.

Sources Meets Expectations: Sources come directly from the topic you address or from scholarly journals.

Citations Meets Expectations: References Meets Expectations:

Spelling/Grammar Meets Expectations Spelling and grammer looks great

Language Meets Expectations The language you used was good overall but some parts felt over worded at times, but you have a great voice in your writing and use a wide range of vocabulary

Organization Meets Expectations Your edit is well organized and very clear

Coding Meets Expectations, there were a few words that would be great if they had hyperlinks such as constituencies so that the reader has better understanding and if they are unsure can click the word!

Validity Meets Expectations All of the information has sources to back it and seems to fit together well

Completion Meets Expectations you did a great job overall and you completed the assignment in full and provided sources.

Relevance Meets Expectations The information is relevant to your topic, I liked how you provided background and added important details into your work

Sources Meets Expectations You have all required 20 sources, and it seems they all come from reputable sources such as scholarly jounrnals, and official pages etc.

Citations Somewhat Meets Expectations: You did a good job citing, but I would go back through and fix the date errors for your sources, additionally, I would go to the journals and input the URLs striaght from the journals rather than copy and pasting it from your browser because it creates an error and links to a PSU proxy server References Meets Expectations you had great references through out the edit

Gracelorelei (talk) 04:43, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Spelling/Grammar
Nearly meets standards I noticed several unneeded commas and slight errors, i.e. where you have the quote, "in particular those groups traditionally excluded from the democratic process," you never included a period at the end, and where you wrote "they believed it need to," before the quote, you should change it to say "needed to."Also, in the first paragraph you wrote "July first," but you could probably change it to "July 1st."

Language
Nearly meets standards You did a good job keeping a formal and unopinionated tone throughout your article, however some of the sentences could be worded better. The way they are now seems too choppy, perhaps try to to make the sentences flow together?

Organization
Nearly meets standard. I would break up the two paragraphs you have and try keeping connected information together. For example, you'd have one paragraph in the beginning about the history of Scotland's Parliament, and one paragraph at the end about Scotland's Parliament now, including the live broadcasting and such.

Coding
Meets standards You included several wiki links throughout your article, well done!

Validity
Meets standard It all seems like solid information.

Completion
Nearly meets standard As stated above, you should skim through what you have and correct some spelling errors as well as organize your paragraphs and sentences a little better. Also, consider adding a picture or two, it never hurts!

Relevance
Meets standard It's all decent information for those who need it.

Evaluation 12/6 Gracelorelei (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Spelling/Grammar Meets Expectations Spelling and grammer looks great

Language Meets Expectations The language you used was good overall but some parts felt over worded at times, but you have a great voice in your writing and use a wide range of vocabulary

Organization Meets Expectations Your edit is well organized and very clear

Coding Meets Expectations, there were a few words that would be great if they had hyperlinks such as constituencies so that the reader has better understanding and if they are unsure can click the word!

Validity Meets Expectations All of the information has sources to back it and seems to fit together well

Completion Meets Expectations you did a great job overall and you completed the assignment in full and provided sources.

Relevance Meets Expectations The information is relevant to your topic, I liked how you provided background and added important details into your work

Sources Meets Expectations You have all required 20 sources, and it seems they all come from reputable sources such as scholarly jounrnals, and official pages etc.

Citations Somewhat Meets Expectations: You did a good job citing, but I would go back through and fix the date errors for your sources, additionally, I would go to the journals and input the URLs striaght from the journals rather than copy and pasting it from your browser because it creates an error and links to a PSU proxy server References Meets Expectations you had great references through out the edit

References Meets expectations