User talk:Beachlover12/Content editing

Peer Review

The article overall gives good useful information on content editing, but is limited. It does need more information about content editing and applictaions. Also the lead does need more information, but overall you guys are doing a good job.

Btsailfish (talk) 21:57, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Team, I left my review! In case you can't access it, here is what I wrote:

The sources you have added to your sandbox draft will help develop your article further!

Your lead states "Content editing, also known as substantive editing, comprehensive editing, macro editing, or heavy editing." This is a lot. I don't think readers would truly care about the other ways content editing is called.

I don't think "Comprehensive editors are a type of language professional," is really relevant to your article.

Your article could use some pictures in it as well.

I like how your article is not walls of text. It's quick and concise. It gets to the point. Good structure, but could use another topic if you wanted to add one.

Overall, adding pictures will put you in great shape!

Diligent Daisy (talk) 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, found some grammar edits and overall edits to help make the content easier to read, which will be provided at a later date. Overall, needs more content and references. Suggests: photos, history section, or the basics of how to content edit. Wxgirl24 (talk) 14:24, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]