User talk:Menschel/sandbox

Citing Sources

It looks like the auto-cite didn't pick up the url info. Profhanley (talk) 19:08, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Page?

Kyle - -I'm confused about which wikipedia page you want to work on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profhanley (talk • contribs) 18:09, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

       I switched to the essay This Is Water by David Foster Wallace last Thursday, remember? The page is even below Start-Class Menschel (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 19:45, 19 October 2017 (UTC) 

Peer Review

Hello Menschel, Very nice layout and structure. Your references come across reliable and noteworthy. You also did very well with the wikilinks throughout your draft.

There are just a couple things I would like to give feedback on: First, there are some grammatical errors for instance: in the first sentence of the first paragraph there are two periods, so just be mindful of grammar/punctuation. Also within the first paragraph you mention “is often considered among the best commencement speeches ever delivered,” -- I believe it to be a biased statement, as the goal is to stay neutral, so you may want to think about the language here? (just a suggestion).

Overall, I think the references pertain to the information at hand and it shows that you really engaged in this research. I also really like the "themes" layout and emphasis. I hope this help, good job and good luck! QuiteCurious (talk) 21:49, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

A good, in depth article exploring the essay delivered by author David Wallace. Good research with citations to support. I am curious to the reactions of speech readers; what are the reactions of people to this essay? A section dedicated to the exploration of this might be a wonderful addition to the article. You would be able to introduce different views, interpretations, and 'ways of reading'!

Just make sure to double check for any grammatical errors or wording before publishing. Looking good so far! Dmakeever (talk) 00:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC)Derek

Peer review

Hi! So, I don't have too much to add to the two peer reviews you already have, because I tend to agree with them. Really nicely done, well-researched, sources look really good. I agree with Dmakeever that-- if there's enough content out there-- a section about 'Reception' would be pretty neat to see, so that we can hear the various viewpoints other people have about the speech. (you do go into that a little in the Themes section, though)

Something I also wanted to mention, the Lead section provides important information, but it doesn't act much like a summary of the article as a whole. The little Wiki module on Peer Reviews suggests the lead section should 'reflect the most important information' in the article. So maybe you could tweak that just a little?

At any rate, this looks really good! I was interested enough to actually track down and listen to the speech myself, so I think you summarized it well. Digitalhumanitiestudent1 (talk) 18:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)