MichaelSegura
| This user is a student editor in Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/California_State_University,_East_Bay/Medical_Humanities_(Fall_2017). Student assignments should always be carried out using a course page set up by the instructor. It is usually best to develop assignments in your sandbox. After evaluation, the additions may go on to become a Wikipedia article or be published in an existing article. |
Welcome!
editHello, MichaelSegura, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian 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
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:17, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Smita's Peer Review
editI am going to comment on the five elements the best Wiki articles have. Under each element, I will discuss what I think is good and what could be changed (given that the sources needed to make such changes are available).
1. A lead section that is easy to understand The lead section is short and sweet. I know you did not make any edits to this, but perhaps this could be expanded with what inspires the artist. It would also be nice to know why he does his portraits in black and white instead of color. An introduction to the rest of the page would be nice to readers to gain more depth on the artist.
2. A clear structure Overall the article follows a chronological order. I see on the talk page that you mentioned possibly adding a "gay rights/AIDS" section. This would be nice to read and would add more detail of the article. The early life has a good amount of detail; it is simple and to the point.
3. Balanced coverage The different sections in the article has varying amounts of information. For example, the death section has barely any information when compared to his early and artistic life sections. If there are any sections that need some more detail, I would say it is the Introduction and the Death sections.
4. Neutral content All of the content on the article is neutral and there is no usage of words that stray from the "encyclopedic" nature of the article. There is no use of emotional verbiage which is good. The article gets straight to the point and sticks to the facts.
5. Reliable sources I checked out the links and they all work. The ones I clicked on appeared to come from non-biased sources that appear to be peer-reviewed. Nice!
Overall grammar looks good. Nice job! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssahay2 (talk • contribs) 02:45, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Response to my peer review
editThank you for your peer review on Paul Sepuya. I completely agree that there needs to be a "Style" section that talks about his work. I added it between "Early Life" and "Career" just like you suggested. This definitely helps with the flow of the article. Ssahay2 (talk) 00:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)