User talk:Tiax22x/sandbox

Riven's peer review

 * Your part of the article connected very well to the rest of the article.
 * I was able to fact check your claims with the sources you provided which is good.

Dan's review
Great job of finding a spot in this article where your research could make an impact, Tia. Your summary of Margolis's research seems like a necessary addition to this section. I have a few questions, just to clarify things that I'm a bit confused about: These questions are really just to clear up my own confusion -- as someone who's not as familiar with the case -- but clarifying this to answer my questions might help other Wikipedia readers as well. Overall, though, this looks like it's going to be a really great Wikipedia contribution! --Daniel.messier (talk) 13:29, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You wrote: "In the book, Margolis salvaged eighteen interviews previously used in Donald Spoto’s Marilyn Monroe: The Biography due to most of the interviewees now being deceased." I'm not sure what her was "... due to the interviewees being deceased" and I'm not sure why the interviews needed to be salvaged. (Was it that the interviewees had died, and thus the existing interview (by Spoto) was their only comment? And does salvage mean that Margolis found it in Spoto's research notes, rather than published materials?)
 * You wrote: "Although he reused those interviews, Margolis claimed that he had vital information regarding Marilyn’s last moments that had not been previously used by any other author. He conducted over twenty interviews with Marilyn’s friends and other individuals that were in contact with her during her last year of life." Is the reason that Margolis disputed Spoto's claim because of these twenty interviews? If, I might recommend flipping these sentences, putting the second one first.
 * You wrote: "The interviews gave further information regarding her death, though none of which could be used as evidence." Why couldn't it be used as evidence? (And why does this matter?)