User:Chunt25/Historical thinking/Kkaitlyn0304 Peer Review
Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional ResourcesCheck out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions. |
General info[edit]
- Whose work are you reviewing?
Chunt25
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:Chunt25/Historical thinking
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Historical thinking
Evaluate the drafted changes[edit]
Hi! The first thing I noticed about your edits were the grammatical corrections you made to the first paragraph in your sandbox- nice catch! I appreciate the bold text so I can see what you added/changed. After checking your sources, they seem reliable and relevant for your article. I like how you expanded the original paragraph by adding information about the first/second/third order sources and went into a brief, but detailed description of them.
I was a bit confused on your edits at first because it seems like you are editing the same paragraph about using primary sources as evidence, but have different information in each section of your sandbox, but I figured that's what the sandbox is for! I think if you combine both, the information that both have would create a cohesive paragraph about using primary sources as evidence. I also recommend using the strikethrough option so you can "cross off" the original text and then include your bolded changes so it makes it easier for the editor to see what you changed. Lastly, to create a consistent paragraph, I recommend changing the way you type out the numbers regarding the first/second/third order sources. For example, you have "a first order primary source" and also "3rd order documents". I think if you stuck to one way of typing the numbers it would look a bit more together.
I love that you are expanding on the benchmarks for historical thinking section of the article! As for next steps, you could expand on the other five parts of the section so they all have about the same amount of information in them (if that information is available). I really like how you were able to find new information that was not already included in this section and that makes me want to continue expanding my article as well! I also like how you were willing to change what was already in the article, and that makes me want to cross out parts of my article and rewrite them (mine was a smaller article, so I just expanded it). Overall, I think your edits are great so far! I can't wait to see what else you add.