User talk:HollyAnderson2698/projectdraft

So far it appears you have migrated the existing content into your draft page. The next steps are to start adding your content to make the page more comprehensive and complete. Mosterbur (talk) 14:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)Mosterbur

Review by Breanalloyd

Great job working on contributing to the Wiki Page: International Institute of Peace. This page had little to no information at first and after reviewing both online and in person with you your wiki project page I find you to be making great strides. The addition of History, Founders, About sections work very well to lay the ground work for your page. I would recommend being careful about your arrangement of the subheadings in order to chronologically make the most sense. Also make sure you're providing proper citations for all the information you're adding and providing to strengthen the wiki page. I think adding the definition of the Institute of Peace is very helpful. I would also recommend you add an Abstract type section to summarize the overall information you're presenting on this wiki page's topic. Also be very careful to try and maintain as neutral of a tone as you can. I know that when using outside sources to strengthen a page it can be very hard to maintain the neutrality especially since the information you're presenting may be a bit foreign even to you. I would try to avoid being overly "flowery" with your content's language and try as Professor O stated to present the material in a way that a fourth grader could read and understand it. Overall great job so far! Keep up the great work :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Breanalloyd (talk • contribs) 19:45, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Secondary Review By: Breana Lloyd

Looking over your user page for your project draft of your wiki page I realized that I was unsure as to what you personally had edited as it is all in one text unitalicized, unbolded, all black text, etc. I think it would make revising and viewing it easier especially when transferring it live to the wiki world if you made more clear what you edited/added. Keep up the good work! I look forward to meeting with you again to review your page work and progress plans thus far! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Breanalloyd (talk • contribs) 22:29, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Review by Breanalloyd

After speaking with you in person today and reiterating the sections that you edited personally I have a greater understanding of what I can recommend as I had today in person. You mentioned that you edited/added the subheadings as well as the about section. After reviewing the wiki project page you are working on and editing I can recommend that you add more to the sections in which you added the subheadings as well as maybe going in and checking the sources and information pre-presented to confirm that it is both accurate and referenced/cited correctly. Overall I think you're on a good track in the right general direction of editing this page, so keep up the good work and keep chugging along finding sources and adding information and scholarly sources to cite. If you have any questions don't hesitate to reach out to me and I will do my best to aid in providing you assistance or feedback.

Peer Review by Olivia Wright

I think you're off to a great start in adding content to this article. The new headers provide better organization as well. However, there are a couple places where you may have written in more of an essay-style, such as "The IIP does a lot of things and helps in many ways." While this may be true, it comes off a little bias, as if you're trying to tell the reader(s) what to take away from the facts given. If you took this out, and just stated what the things are that they do, and how they help (which you already do), this would eliminate any issues of this kind. I know it's pretty difficult to move away from the writing style required to construct essays and introduce topics, and I understand where the use of this statement is coming from, but overall you do a good job with it. There are just a couple places like these that could be stronger. From here, I would next work on adding to the History section, and adding hyperlinks to what you've already written, as there is a decent amount of terms used in the About section that could use context.