Leisribs

Welcome!

Hello, Leisribs, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:26, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review

The picture could be changed considering its a relatively bad picture. There could be more added in the early life section such as several significant events. It skips all the way up to when he was in high school and doesn't mention much about that either. College career section is very well written and good, could mention that Van Exel is now in the UC Basketball Hall of Fame. Could possibly drop the sentence in the Professional Career section that references Van Exel pushing a ref. The main point(s) of the article is Van Exel's playing career and his statistics. I believe this sentence would be better suited elsewhere in the article because it seems out of place and forced. In the professional career section there could be more references to specific games that Van Exel played well in rather than just mentioning his stats for each team and where he was traded to next. Mention in coaching career that he is currently still with the Grizzlies as an assistant coach. I believe that you could completely get rid of the player highlights article and add it to the Professional Career article. Other and Personal Life articles should certainly have more talking points. The points in these articles are completely irrelevant and random.