User talk:DriftWrench2k
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, DriftWrench2k, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor 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. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
comments
[edit]General info Whose work are you reviewing? DriftWrench2k Link to draft you're reviewing:https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:DriftWrench2k/Honkai_Impact_3rd_editing Content
Guiding questions:
Is the content added relevant to the topic? yes Is the content added up-to-date? yes Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? All of the content added seems useful and pertinent to the topic. Some of the content can be expanded on for example, you can go into further detail about how Devil May Cry and Bayonetta affected the game makers ideas. Content evaluation: Has a very good start Tone and Balance: Does a good job at presenting factual evidence without bias.
Guiding questions:
Is the content added neutral? Yes it is based on fact instead of personal ideas. Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Nothing is over represented. Some of the topics just need a little more detail. Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No Sources and References: There are a lot of good sources used. Everything is backed up by a reference or marked by the author awaiting a citation.
Guiding questions:
Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The only ones that have not been given a reference are marked by the author as a reminder to cite them. Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes Are the sources current? yes Check a few links. Do they work? yes Sources and references evaluation: a lot of useful links Organization: Easy to follow and good headings
Guiding questions:
Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is very concise and easy to read. Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? None Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The sectioning of the information is very clear and useful. Organization evaluation: very well organized Overall impressions: strong start with good categories
Guiding questions:
Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, it gives a better understanding of the game, how it is continuously updating, and how people respond to this. What are the strengths of the content added? Tone, links, and organization How can the content added be improved? Going into more depth about what the updates have changed. Overall evaluation: Very strong start. The writing is done in a very neutral tone and just needs expanded.