User talk:Thebodocious/T’s Trans Subjectivity and Communication, Rhetoric and Queer Public Memory, and Communication and Homonationalism

J's Peer Review to T
Hi! I hope you are had a great weekend! I think all of what you mentioned is very relevant to your article topic, so in that category, you are definitely on the right track. I think your article is also very neutral and checking the words to watch, you use none, so you are also good on that category as well. I think the viewpoints are perfectly balanced. I think your citations in this is good because you use DOIs independent from TXST, but one of them, the Thomas Dunn one, has an error. Both of your sources are also very recent, especially the one from 2023. I think I would move your citations up or add more because your lead has none despite the fact you are defining a word. I would make sure to litter citations more in your sentences. You have a good lead sentence, so I know exactly what you are about to talk about. I think in your last sentence you misspelt anti when trying to say anti-LGBTQ+. You didn't include any opinions, so you are also clear there. You write completely in third person, so that's good. Again, I would just make sure you cite more stuff. The requirements say that we need to cite every two sentences. You also need to cite one more article because the minimum is 3 and you did 2. I think you did really good and write really concisely! You are a really good clean writer! Moonmocha (talk) 23:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Dr. E's Review
T, good start here on this section too, especially in trying out Wiki-style writing. I liked how you linked to another wiki page (cool!). As J notes, bring in more citations after sentences so we don’t wonder where things came from. Jargon also needs unpacking. Please see Canvas for more feedback. OsaRosa (talk) 06:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback
Hi @Thebodocious, Definitely agree with the feedback above especially about the need for more inline citations. We want the reader to be able to verify the information in your contribution. It's always better to overcite than to undercite.

I like the little paragraph that starts with, "Public memory, especially queer public memory..", and I think it would be a good for this paragraph to go before "Public memory has an important.." because it ties this section on public memory to the greater article topic of "LGBTQ+ Communications studies", the academic field of study.

I think the sentence "Public memory has an important connection to the LGBTQ+ community" doesn't need to be in your contribution because it doesn't really tell us a fact. . I think it'd be better for that paragraph to start with the sentence, "Because of the history behind the stig..."

Let me know if you have any questions about what I wrote above or in general about this project. Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 23:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)