User talk:Camotero2013/sandbox

Peer Edits for Yo Soy 123

I agree with all of the other peer edits, the content of this article is really extensive and informative! But I absolutely had the same first impression, which is that this reads more like an essay than a wikipedia article. The lead in should be much more concise and clarified, probably with a heading, and should be no longer than a paragraph or two. I also agree that many more subsections could exist so that people would be able to find specific details that they might be able to look for. Maybe you could section out things like media roles (social media as well as TV media.) Also, I think it would be possible to just put the bulk of the information you have in the first section under a section like "Details" or "Background." The information you have is great, but I think it should be a little bit easier for people to see that they are reading about the basics of the group.

As far as the writing, I think you do a really nice job of using encyclopedic language, and making it accessible to the reader! I don't see many typos or syntax problems. Make sure that you have a citation for everything, and that you are listing them in the proper places. Your article is interesting because there is a lot of quoted material (The Manifesto, the General Principles, etc.) but just make sure you're covering your tracks on all of those citations as well.

Really great start! I look forward to seeing where this ends up. NSully83 (talk) 20:19, 2 November 2013 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by NSully83 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Peer Editing Response

You have a great start. The article is very informative, with lots of useful information. It covers enough to give the reader a good idea of what is going on. One somethings I would work on editing is the structure of the article. I feel like when you glance at it at first, it jumps out with lots of writing and words, maybe a little too much. The reader maybe came on the article to get a specific answer, and when looking how much they have to read, they wont even take time to look at the article twice. Start with your lead in paragraph. This is a very important part of the article, and your lead in paragraph has alot of different points in and is very lengthy. I would maybe focus on narrowing it down to the most important factors that contribute to it. Also another thing to think about is the subsections of important people and places, or important names. Some people may want to know more about the specific people you keep mentioning, so maybe linking it to another article about just that person, or place. Lastly, I would also look at your context. When I was reading it, it was flowing more like a paper essay with the certain words or like a story. I would focus on maybe linking it down to the facts and statistics more, and getting straight to the point. Otherwise, everything else was good. You sound like you know what you are talking about, and that you have enough knowledge on it to put together a great article! Good job, and good luck!

Prof. V Feedback Pre-first Draft

Hi Camotero! I see some copy editing happening, but no editing yet regarding content.

The very important thing needed was to re-enter the original article into your sandbox. I have done this for you – please look. You will need to redo the limited copyediting already completed. This programming is needed so you can truly edit the article without wiping out all the previous work of the article.

You will need to really kick into gear for the draft due on the 8th. For that day, please have the revisions and additions you plan to make fully complete. Please make an appointment with me if you need help. In my comments here, I will give you my suggestions of the inclusions I would find helpful as a reader of this article. My suggestions assume that you can find reliable sources that allow you to make changes from a neutral point of view.

• From current events to encyclopedia article. As I’ve mentioned before, one great contribution you can make is to start to turn this set of current events into a definitive account for “the history books.” Think about how you can do this by editing out less important facts and searching for articles that begin to establish what 132 means for Mexican history. This is also a matter of editing the wording.
• As you look for more sources and incorporate them, I recommend as a plan of action:

Cutting out some of the text to focus on what’s most important. Your other peer editor said this, too!

Finding early analysis of what the movement means

Linking to Occupy or Arab Spring (part of your proposal)

Updating with post-2012 information.

I look forward to reading your work!!! Prof.Vandegrift (talk) 16:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Revisions and additions

I took into account the suggestions I received from my peer editors and set out to eliminate information no longer up to date or relevant. The lead in summary was trimmed down to the key points and the origins section was revised by rewording the content and deleting content as well as providing new citations and a new image. I looked to the Spanish wiki Movimiento YoSoy132 as guidance in including detail that was needed. The protest section originally had 3 protests, all specific to Mexico. I decided to delete these and include information about how these protests have occurred in states all over Mexico and in different cities of the world. In the Goals section, I deleted the General principles because I felt they were not relevant to the section. I included a new section detailing the connections made between YoSoy132 and Occupy as well as the Arab Springs. I cleaned up and relabeled a section now titled Related movements in Mexico. Camotero2013 (talk) 16:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I left some feedback for you on your talk page, but I can see that you've already answered some of my questions above. I can see that some of your peer editors have advised you to make the article more concise, but I would advise you against deleting so much content from the article. Perhaps there is a way you can update the outdated information without deleting so much of the content that previous editors worked on. I think that ComputerJA provided some excellent suggestions for how to improve the article on its talk page. Specifically he/she mentioned the need for expansion of the article, especially of the background and the events that have transpired since 2012. Here are some specific suggestions:

• The old lead section was a bit long, but it did a much better job of summing up the article and describing what the protest movement is about than yours does. An article of this length will typically have three to four paragraphs in the lead section.
• The protest section documented the country-wide protests that the movement was based on and I think the level of detail there was good. Your revised protests section doesn't include any of the details and much of it is dedicated to a lengthy list of places where rallies and marches occurred. A good article will use more prose and have a narrative quality. Also missing is the last paragraph of that section, which tied the protests into the 2012 elections, an important facet that could be expanded upon.
• One could argue whether the general principles should be included in the article, but if the reason for removal is that they aren't relevant to the section, the section could just be renamed or the principles could be placed in their own section.

Please let me know if you would like me to clarify or if you have any questions. Gobōnobō ^{+ c} 22:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)