User talk:Thisisquitealongusername/sandbox

Peer Review
General comments:
 * I would recommend keeping the sections that explain the various forms/strategies of GFL to the minimum needed to understand each, in order to increase clarity. These explanation sections could include the examples you've provided as well (quite helpful).
 * Going off of this point, I would consider creating a section along the lines of "Related research" in which you could include the results of various studies. At a high level (limiting detail) what have the results of specific studies shown for each strategy?  This would allow you to pull specific study details out of the sections that explain each strategy, and could help to increase clarity and readability.

Minor Points:
 * In the introduction, I would recommend adding a sentence that compares and/or contrasts "Gender fair language" with "Gender-Neutral Language." This would be a good opportunity to add a link to the GNL page in your intro.
 * It would also be helpful to add a sentence into the Intro stating that the two main types of GFL are Feminization forms and Neutralization.
 * Could you add a link to gender-bias in the intro? This is an important concept especially as it relates to the "Motivation" behind GFL studies.
 * The second sentence under "Feminization Forms" could be moved to a "Studies" section, and replaced with roadmap-like sentence that says "Feminization forms include pair forms, ... etc." This would help the reader understand the layout of the article that follows.
 * Depending on what the [Review of how GFL works] note will include, this may not end up fitting under the "Motivation" heading.

Biologist122 (talk) 18:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)