User talk:Aaleksanian/sandbox

Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

Name of student reviewer **Replace with username for version on talk page**	Wikipedia User: Keronica Grant
Date of review	5/1/2013
Name of editor**Replace with username for version on talk page**	Wikipedia User: Aaleksanian
URL of editor’s Userpage	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aaleksanian/sandbox
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page	5/2/13
Date review submitted to instructor
Length of edit (too long/too short)	Good length
Image (needed/appropriate)	The image was appropriate
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit)	The information that was provides is accurate from the textbook
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed	This article is primary
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych)	The article information was relevant to I/O Psych topic.
Wikiformatting	Good on formatting your page
Grammar & composition	None
Other comments	Great topic !--Keronica Grant (talk) 21:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

Name of student reviewer **Replace with username for version on talk page**	Wikipedia User:SRampersaud
Date of review	4/23/2013
Name of editor**Replace with username for version on talk page**	Wikipedia User: Aaleksanian
URL of editor’s Userpage	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aaleksanian/sandbox
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page
Date review submitted to instructor
Length of edit (too long/too short)	Good length
Image (needed/appropriate)	The image was appropriate for this topic.
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit)	The information provided was accurate from the text book
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed	This article is primary
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych)	The article information was relevant to I/O Psych topic and added information was accurate from the text.
Wikiformatting	Good job on adding the external link on the main page
Grammar & composition	None
Other comments	Sign talk page on sandbox for the edits

Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

Name of student reviewer: Wikipedia User: M.Caban 

Date of review: 4/12/2013

Name of editor: Wikipedia User: Aaleksanian 

URL of editor’s Userpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aaleksanian/sandbox

Length of edit (too long/too short)

• Good length

Image (needed/appropriate)

• If it can be found, an image will be appropriate.

Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit)

• Information provided was accurate to the book information.

Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed

• N/A

Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych)

• Editor contribution to the article page is an accurate I/O Psy topic and is found in the textbook.

Wikiformatting

• Adding some more Wiki fancy formatting can be beneficial, but not necessarily needed.
• Has correct and accurate links to other Wiki pages

Grammar & composition

• Space is needed between the words "housework,childcare,shopping"
• Add (an) between "with" and "outside" on the sentence: "and cooking with outside job"

Other comments

• None

  M.Caban (talk) 20:21, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

this is not a test

Dear Armine, You should reply to that editor, they are trying to be helpful. You need to remember that in Wikipedia talk, primary sources is different from a primary article. If you read what Lova Falk says, an undergrad textbook is just okay - published articles would be better.

You didn't provide any context to where you'd put your material. You don't have that much info for a new section. LF pointed out a real problem with your idea.

Also, you chose a "hot" article on Wikipedia to edit. The article is long, well established and under the scrutiny of lots or editors. The editors will put you through the wringer on this one, but you know that adds points to your grade.

Dr Ashton (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

more

you could try to rewrite what you have and fit it into the "causes" section of the article. Dr Ashton (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Name of student reviewer	Wikipedia User:Fernando18
Date of review	4/24/2013
Name of editor**Replace with username for version on talk page**	Wikipedia User: Aaleksanian
URL of editor’s Userpage	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aaleksanian/sandbox
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page	04/24/13
Date review submitted to instructor	04/24/13
Length of edit (too long/too short)	Perfect length
Image (needed/appropriate)	Good image showed great details.
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit)	Very accurate
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed	N/A
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych)	N/A
Wikiformatting	External link was good
Grammar & composition	None
Other comments	none

Name of student reviewer **Replace with username for version on talk page**	Wikipedia User:Xyzbb1253
Date of review	4/26/13
Name of editor**Replace with username for version on talk page**	Wikipedia User:Aaleksanian
URL of editor’s Userpage	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aaleksanian/sandbox
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page	4/26/13
Date review submitted to instructor	4/26/13
Length of edit (too long/too short)	Acceptable length
Image (needed/appropriate)	Image not required but helps.
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit)	Information is similar to information from the textbook.
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed	N/A
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych)	N/A
Wikiformatting	Neutral point of view, verifiable accuracy, reliable citation, authoritative source, citaton needs to be fixed though.
Grammar & composition	Grammar is fine, but you need to place the citations at the end of your sentences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources.
Other comments	Make sure to cite properly, you’re set to go.
Reviewer's Signature	Xyzbb1253 (talk) 18:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)