User talk:Scotti mills/sandbox

After reading the article on identity politics, it seems to me as though the page could have been constructed better. It spent a lot of time discussing queer and gender identity politics, but spent little time addressing other minorities. I also found that when the history of identity politics was discussed, the article was weak in its historical descriptions and could have contained more sources and been less scattered around. Further, I think it could have contained more information both in a modern perspective since there was not much mention of identity politics beyond the 1980's and also could have left out the section on art and culture because it didn't seem to contribute much to the overall understanding of the topic or drive its themes further.

draft commentary

Scott, It looks like you've done a nice job so far of reworking this article, although it's not entirely clear (easy to see) exactly what you've added an what was in the original. If there are places where the original lacks citations (as it seems to), that's also something you can add to, so keep that in mind. I agree with your peer reviewer that a bit more about the act's history in the background section would be helpful, and there are a few other places like that where you could flesh out the original. Adovevie (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2017 (UTC)