User talk:TheSonoran445/sandbox

Leif Larsen: Peer Review #1

Quality of Lead: The lead is very good and full of great information, I really liked how you included sources and hyperlinks even in lead. After you mention when he attended the state constitutional convention of virginia, I think you meant to make a new heading titled “Birth and Early Life”

Clarity of Article: The article is great, when you include the extra heading about Birth and Early Life it will clearly show 4 nice sections. I think it would be a nice addition under the Death section if you note the age when he died.

Balance coverage: I think the article has a lot of good balanced coverage, it looks almost complete. The lead section seems a little bit long, but I think when you separate it into two parts by including a Birth and Early Life section it will all come together.

Neutrality: The article remains neutral

Reliability: You have included great sources. You reference two text’s quite frequently that both appear to be from really reliable sources, and we have already as a class deemed the use of black past as a reliable source.

Amber Tollerud Peer Review#2

Your article does an excellent job of retaining a neutral tone throughout and is organized well. The balance of headings and content is also done effectively. One small suggestion however, would be to take the information regarding his autobiography and put it in the Death section instead, as it seems more relevant to his later years than his early life. As for sources my only suggestion would be to use a source for the first sentence of the “Antebellum Activist” section. The lead section is very informative and draws the reader in, but some of the information is a bit redundant to the Abolitionist section. You could simplify the information as you cover it sufficiently later in the article. Nice work hyperlinking important names and events throughout your article, it makes it very professional looking. Great start, and good luck! (Ambertollerud (talk) 23:19, 28 November 2018 (UTC))

Prof. Smith feedback: Hi James,

AS your peer reviewers have noted above, this article is in very good shape and it doesn't need much to be ready for the final revision. It is very thorough, well written, and interesting. You clearly did your research well! I have just a few comments on minor things to work on:

- You do have the required number of sources (3), but you really lean hard on Lowe and less on the others. I'm slightly concerned that Wikipedia editors may charge that you don't have enough sources if they don't look carefully. Could you include some citations to some of your other sources (such as the books that you mention in the bibliography at the end)? That would help the citations look a bit more well rounded and diverse.

- I would make it clear in your very first lead sentence that Willis was African American. The reader can, of course, infer it through the next sentence, but I think referring to him as an "African American abolitionist, etc." in the first sentence will help clear that up immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StaceySmithOSU (talk • contribs) 21:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)