User talk:Tkennie/sandbox

Peer Review by Tristancater08 and Nnaimthe1
The major issue with this article is that there are no citations for this article, therefore it is nearly impossible to factually check what has been written in this article. It is very important to include some citations in your article, as this could possibly be counted as plagiarism. However, even looking beyond the lack of citations, there are some other issues with the article as well:

First of all, there are a few grammatical mistakes in the article. For example, some first words in sentences are not capitalized at the beginning (ex. "seeds of hope was a group of four women (also called the Warton Four)..."), so the word Seeds should be capitalized here. Also, the sentence "Some of the women even went on the right books about the event and it became a famous event." should be "Some of the women even went on to write books about the event and it became a famous event." It's a good idea to proofread the article once you've completed it to make sure there are no grammatical mistakes like the ones we found.

Finally, looking at the neutrality of this article, the article appears to lean slightly towards the viewpoint that what the women did was a correct, or a good thing. It might be a good idea to include information on how other parties viewed the situation. For example, how did the British military view this incident? Or the general public? Or the media? These ideas, as long as they can be cited, would definitely expand the potential for this article.

Overall, the article is, at the moment off to a good start, but it certainly needs to be expanded and fixed. Using this peer review advice, you could definitely make the article good enough to be published on Wikipedia.

Tino's Peer Review
Your article could do with a bit of work. Some minor errors such as punctuation and grammar can be fixed too. From your article evaluation, you seem to have an idea of what your article needs. Now it's a matter of doing your research and adding the necessary content. You might have to start with the history or the background first before delving into motives and so on. The seeds of hope heading is very broad and could be expanded and more detailed. There are no references to check if the information provided is factual or not. The article sounds a lot like a story than an article. Your articles would be a lot substantial with tags of other Wikipedia pages you can mention if you deem necessary. Yes there is the fictional dynamic, however, it's necessary to provide background details. Your article is interesting though and I am excited to see how it unfolds. All the best! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinomungoni (talk • contribs) 01:06, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review by evy703
I don’t think the bullet in the first paragraph under seeds of hope is needed A few grammatical issues Perhaps put the ages in brackets In what currency is the 2.08 million dollars Not that many sources No in-text citations More information could be added

I enjoyed reading the article

Evy703 (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)evy703