User talk:Mountstudent/sandbox
Instructor feedback
editBoth of your articles are excellent choices. Well done! For this project please work on the Writing Style article. Please let your group members know which passage you are working on, as they will also be looking for supporting articles/information.
--Librarydenyse (talk) 16:50, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Moved your 2nd article and observation here so that it is clearer to your group members what they need to contribute --Librarydenyse (talk) 20:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Prewriting
Prewriting is the first stage of the writing process, typically followed by drafting, revision, editing and publishing.[1][2][3]outlining[disambiguation needed], diagramming, storyboarding clustering[disambiguation needed] (for a technique similar to clustering, see mind mapping).
Observation: This article does not meet wikipedia standards. Wikipedia is not a how to guide, yet this article is written that way. Also, a lot of the work is not cited and it was all done by the same person as far as I can tell. Generally wikipedia articles are written and edited by many users. This article needs a lot of work.
Feedback Worksheet
Choose a classmate’s Wikipedia Sandbox page.
Links to sandbox pages are available in Moodle within each of the groups. Please choose a classmate whose work you have not yet reviewed.
Review the page.
Your name: Hameed Mohamed
Name of Sandbox: Mountstudent
Please verify that the article(s) they have chosen are appropriate for their citation and new content. Please use the evaluation criteria that you used for your own content (i.e relevancy, author expertise, reputable publisher, secondary sources based on research)
[ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Maybe
If they are any issues, please identify which of the criteria was not fully met.
If the source was not appropriate, do you have any suggestions regarding a search strategy that might help them to find a better source?
The source was appropriate regarding the topic ‘writing style’, the source has compromised the relationship between reading and writing, as well as, how reading affects the persons writing style. there was relevancy, author expertise, and reputable publisher, from the source that has been used as a reference for the topic writing style.
Is the new passage well written and grammatically correct?
Yes, the new passage has been well written and has had one grammatical mistake, however, overall the passage was explained well in details. More information can be added to the new passage to explain to the readers more about formal and informal writing.
Do you have any suggestions that might improve upon the passage?
My suggestions that will improve upon the passage is adding more citations to the new passage to show readers the credibility and relevance of the passage. As well as, more explanation can be added to the new passage such as, the source that has been as a reference talking about the relationship between reading and writing. This will make the passage more explained in details, as well as, will give readers a better understanding about the topic. On the other hand, adding information on the steps of writing style will make the article relevance to the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hmohamed240997 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 8 August 2015 (UTC)