User talk:XinqiaoCheng/sandbox

Feedback on article draft
It seems like I haven't received any feedback from you on my talk page professor. I am wondering if I am looking at the right place. --XinqiaoCheng (talk) 00:17, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I'm not sure what happened. Your article seems like it's off to a good start. Here are a few quick pieces of feedback:
 * In general, according to WP:QUOTE it's good to avoid long quotes. In particular, you might want to avoid ones like the one you have in the first paragraph that is just people closely connected to the subject talking about how great the subject is. Of course the director thinks that the orchestra is great. Similar quotes from music critics might be good ways to support a sentence that explains that the orchestra is renowned although it's not clear you include a quote their either.
 * Some of the second sentence comes across as WP:PUFFERY. Stick to the facts.
 * There is still some clunky English. Try to clean that up as best as you can.
 * You have empty and/or incomplete sections. Either finish those before you move or keep working on those in your sandbox. The article that you move into the main namespace should be in good shape. It's OK if it's not complete. No article in Wikipedia ever really is!

Good start! And Good luck! — m a k o ๛  19:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for the feedback! Working on it! --XinqiaoCheng (talk) 19:53, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I just finished editing my article and moved it to the main space. Below are the changes I have made based on your feedback earlier today:
 * Removed the quote from the director and added one from music critics instead.
 * Tried to clean up some clunky sentences and requested copy editing through the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors.
 * Finished incomplete sections.
 * Added more reliable references.
 * As for the second suggestion you gave me, I am sorry but I didn't find it puffery. Hope you could help me more on that one. Thank you! --XinqiaoCheng (talk) 06:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I meant the second paragraph. You're totally right, the second sentence really is just facts. :) Thee article is looking pretty good! — m a k o ๛  00:11, 25 October 2016 (UTC)