User talk:Grandtutor/XCOR1012-sandbox
Before class on Thursday, February 14, post a critique for each of your assigned peer-group members under the "Peer-Review Feedback" section below. Use the rubric below to assign a grade to each contribution and to guide your critique. Do not simply assign a number: explain why you rated each criterion as you did and then offer the author suggestions for how to improve on that criterion. Be as specific as possible, so that the author can understand exactly where she is doing well and where she needs to make improvements. At the end of each critique, please remember to sign your name using four tildes. Please see the example critique for help shaping yours.
Rubric
[edit]| CRITERIA | 10 pts | 8 pts | 6 pts | 4 pts |
| Well-written | Writing is clear and concise, demonstrates an effective use of grammatical conventions and contains no errors. | Writing is clear and concise, but is grammatically basic or contains a few errors. | Writing attempts clarity and concision, but struggles in some instances; or, writing contains multiple grammatical problems. | Writing is not clear or not concise or contains numerous grammatical errors. |
| Verifiable | All ideas are from reliable sources and are documented with properly formatted citations. | Ideas are from reasonably good sources and are documented with properly formatted citations. | Some ideas are from questionable sources or are undocumented; or, some citations are not properly formatted. | Ideas are not documented or, if documented, come from poor-quality sources. |
| Broad | The writing focuses on a specific aspect of the neighbor that contributes to the overall article in a meaningful way. | The writing focuses on a specific aspect of the neighborhood, but that aspect does not significantly contribute to the overall article. | The writing is somewhat unfocused. | The writing is very unfocused; or, the topic does not contribute anything to the overall article. |
| Neutral | The tone of the writing is mature and authoritative. The writing does not demonstrate any bias. | The tone is authoritative. The writing does not clearly suggest any bias. | The tone is not authoritative; or, the writing suggests a bias of the author. | The tone is inappropriate. |
| Timeliness | The final submission is on time. | The final submission is within 12 hours of the deadline. | The final submission is within 24 hours of the deadline. | The final submission is more than 24 hours after the deadline. |
Group Assignments
[edit]|
Group 1
|
Group 2
|
Group 3
|
Group 4
|
Peer-Review Feedback
[edit]Example Critique
[edit]Luna, I'd rate the writing of your contribution as a 6. It's usually pretty clear, but you have a lot of sentence fragments and run-ons that need to be fixed. Those seem to be the biggest problems. In particular, the first sentence is really well done, so try to write more like that. The second to last sentence had a lot of problems, and I don't really understand what it's trying to say. As for your sources, you only include one citation at the end of each paragraph, and I'm not sure that's the best approach. Is everything in that first paragraph from your first source? Isn't there any addition information you could include to incorporate additional ideas? I'm also giving you 6 for this criterion. However, I think the focus of your selection is just about perfect. You write about one specific topic and you describe it really thoroughly. I'm giving you a 10 for "Broad". Nice work! For Neutral, I'm giving you an 8, because a few times, you say, "I think" or "it seems to me", and those aren't appropriate for a Wikipedia article. I think this will be a really great contribution to our article! jtodd1973 15:29, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Group 1 Critiques
[edit]Destinee your article contribution on the demographic makeup of Gert Town is; concise, factual and objectively written. These traits are fundamental to a good Wikipedia article. Because, your contribution fit these criteria I would rate the writing as a 9 or 10. Even though I think the article is well written I have a minor suggestion. In your first sentence you say the population has been low for years. I think you should include the population as a number in this sentence. This would make your contribution more data driven. On the rubric timeliness, neutral, broad and verifiable would fit into the 10 category but well-written would be an 8. I say this because the ethnic groups Caucasians, Hispanics, and Asians should all be capitalized in your article.Roman civ (talk) 05:05, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Roman, I would rate your article as an 8. I believe that you have useful information pertaining to the subject you chose to do. This information is specifically addressed to the location of Gert Town and the other areas surrounding it which is what your focus was. I do believe the information is well-written, but one thing I would take into consideration would be to fix the placement of your information. It almost seems like as you found information you just typed it but I think it would be better if you organized your information. There are also a couple of grammatical errors that I would fix including "expressway" and "Zero percent". I do find your information very useful and accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmille18 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Roman your article was really good I think it can be finished just setting it into the total assignment. Destinee, I really like the way you synthesize your data into the narrative and story for what the population of Gert Town looks like
Group 2 Critiques
[edit]1. Lazarus' article is straight to the point and informational. He gives the information about the two amusement parks and where they are located. However, in his second paragraph he began to talk about one of the jazz musicians who worked at the amusement park. It is okay to mention them, but he began to go into detail about the musicians life. I feel like he should give more details about the park and not the musicians because there is already a student writing about him. I'm giving him a 10 for well-written and neutral. His work was submitted on time as well deserving him another 10. I'm giving him an 8 for broad because this section could use more information about the main topic. He only used two citations, so I'm going to give him an 8 for verifiable. Overall, Lazarus is heading in the right direction with his contribution to the Gert Town article. (talk)Acousin1 (talk) 17:56, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Lazarus Sutton's Group 2 Critiques 1.) Ke'Veon- Your draft was not posted in the sand box so the highest score I could give you is 4 in all subjects Well-Written-4 Verifiable-4 Broad-4 Neutral-4 Timeliness-4 2.) Ahry- You just need to cite your sources and provide a little more information about your landmark, but good job as a whole Well Written-8-Overall well constructed writing Verifiable-4- you did not provide any sources so I cannot see this as verifiable. Broad-6- You could add more sources, quotes, and facts to have more substance. Neutral-10- Was free of bias and provided essentially the facts, well done Timeliness-10- draft was turned in on time 3.) N/A my own draft 4.) Lauryn- Your draft was not posted in the sand box so the highest I could give you is a 4 in all subjects Well-Written-4 Verifiable-4 Broad-4 Neutral-4 Timeliness-4
Group 3 Critiques
[edit]- Marc, overall your article contribution was well written and very interesting to read. I don't know much about the topic, but from what you've written I now have a general understanding of who Willie "Bunk" Johnson is. As an entirety, your contribution was both well written, verifiable, and had a neutral tone so I'd rate it a 10, but it was not very focused on Gert Town, itself. Your contribution talked a lot about his life and what he did for the city of New Orleans, but it missed the information that explained how he was important to the specific area of Gert Town. Other than that, you did a really good job of making your section very concise and easy to read. RavenRiley (talk) 03:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- Mariia, your article contribution was very informative and gave a lot of statistics about the neighborhood, but both you and Sahabia are using the exact same stats, in the same way, for your article contributions. Based on the first sentence of your contribution, it sounded like you wanted to focus primarily on Gert Town pre-Katrina, but you then strayed away from that topic and started focusing on post-Katrina Gert Town. I think if you solely focus on the neighborhood demographics pre-Katrina, then the demographics section of the page won't be overly repetitive. Other than that, I'd give it a 10 in broad, neutral, and verifiable.RavenRiley (talk) 03:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- Sahabia, your article contribution was informative and full of statistics, it was very focused and easy to understand. My only critique would be to add transitions between the different statistical paragraphs to make it easier to read. I'd rate your contribution a 10 because it's well-written, concise, verifiable, and broad.RavenRiley (talk) 03:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- Marc, I agree with Raven that your contribution was a good read. It was informative but at the same time it wasn't boring. I would just add some more information on how he relates to Gert Town. Sahabia kamal (talk) 17:27, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- Mariia, I think your contribution is informative, verifiable and unbiased. But, I agree with Raven, the beginning seems pre-Katrina, the rest seems post-Katrina. Otherwise, I would rate it a 10. Sahabia kamal (talk) 17:28, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- Raven, your contribution was very focused and the statistics were informative. I would rate it a 10. One thing I noticed was that your citations weren't added properly so I would go back and change that. Other than that, your contribution was broad, to the point and well-written. Sahabia kamal (talk) 17:28, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Group 4 Critiques
[edit]Travis I made minor grammar changes and I think it would be nice to know where this information came from. I would rate well written as 8, verifiable as 4 since I don't know where the information came from. And I think it is broad and relates to article well. Broad is 10, It is Neutral so 10, and on time so I rated it as 10. Blue Plate was designed in 1941 by architect August Perez. It was the very first structure in New Orleans, Louisiana to be built in an Art Moderne style. However; post-Katrina in 2006, the Blue Plate Mayonnaise Factory was renovated into a loft-style apartment complex. The building was renamed Blue Plate Lofts and was rehabilitated by HRI Properties and JCH Development. Its design includes an all-white exterior and rounded glass-block corners. The exterior was also fitted with solar panels a top its roof and a luxury community gallery. Its residential status makes up a mostly mixed-income community. It has become a gated community for its residents, with ADA (American Disability Act) accessibility for people with disabilities. (needs references or sources, where did info come from?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcspice432 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Olivia, your paragraph on migration patterns and population increases is really well written so I give it a 10. Also, your sources are very verifiable so I would rate that as a 10. The subject you approached is broad and a very informative contribution to the article so I would give it a 10. It is a neutral article you didn't take sides and what you wrote is based on a unbiased source so I would rate that as a 10. I would give timeliness an 8. Altogether your paragraph is very good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcspice432 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Kennedy, your grammar is very clear and the entry was well written (10). The sources are reliable and your citations are on point (10). Your topic was broad and focused on Gert Town as a whole (10). Furthermore, the tone was neutral and informative (10), and your assignment was submitted on time (10). I'd just elaborate on why Gert Town was an "unfit" neighborhood.
Travis, there were a few grammatical errors, but the message is clear and concise (8). I couldn't find your source(s) to tell whether or not they were reliable (4). The information was broad (10), the tone was informative and neutral (10), and your submission was timely (10). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.190.213.250 (talk) 19:00, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Group 5 Critiques
[edit]Bree, I’d rate your writing as a 6. Although your writing is clear, it doesn’t seem to fit the 200 minimum word count, a few commas are missing, and some sentences appear to be too vague. In the second sentence, there should be a comma after “and” to split the two independent clauses. There should be a comma after “town” in your third sentence, and the word should be capitalized. In the first sentence of the second paragraph, I think you meant to put “goes” instead of “go”. The second sentence of the second paragraph doesn’t sound grammatically correct, I would reword this to where it does. In your last sentence, there should be a comma after “Charles.” As for verifiability, I would have to give you an 8 because I was only able to open one out of your two sources. However, the one source I was able to open did seem like it had helpful information for your topic. I think your writing is focused on your topic, however, it could be expanded and explained a bit more to really connect to the overall article. For instance, you could write more on how the festival impacted Gert Town. Because of this, I’m going to have to give you a 6 for “Broad”. The tone of your writing doesn’t demonstrate any bias at all. Therefore, I’m giving you a 10 for neutrality. Overall, you picked an interesting topic to write about. I think if you were to thoroughly explain it, it would contribute to the article very nicely --Mnguye60 (talk) 14:17, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Dajanae, I’d rate your writing as an 8. It’s clear and concise, however, there are a few grammatical errors. For instance, in your first sentence, there should be a comma after “Katrina”. In the sixth sentence, “mid 20th” should be hyphenated. Why was the factory shut down? Why did it move from Gretna to Gert Town? Your writing doesn’t seem to make the 200 minimum word count. However, it can still be expanded through the help of these questions. You only included one source. If all of your information is from that one source, should your citation be positioned at the very end of your paragraph? I’m giving you a 10 for verifiability, the one source you had was very informational and reliable, but it doesn’t hurt to expand your contribution and include more than one source. It is clear that throughout your writing contribution, only one topic is being focused on. Because I think your contribution compliments the overall article in a meaningful way, I’m giving you a 10 for “Broad”. I’d rate the neutrality of your writing an 8. In the very last sentence you said that the mayonnaise was “enjoyed by people all over the United States.” In order to remain totally unbiased, I think this part should be taken out. Good job on focusing on your topic in your contribution. I think your writing will do a great job in contributing to the overall article. --Mnguye60 (talk) 14:48, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Group 6 Critiques
[edit]1. Izhayia, I liked how you provided specific details throughout your contribution about the landmarks of Gert Town, such as "The Home." I suggest reviewing your punctuation and use of grammar to tie in the information a little clearer. In addition, please do not use personal opinions as in the last sentence, just use the information from the articles you’ve used as sources. For the category of “Well-Written” I am giving you an 8 since you do have a few grammatical and punctuation errors. I give you a 6 for it being verifiable since you did incorporate personal ideas and you used some citations incorrectly in the first several sentences. As for the category of it being “Broad” I give you a 10 since your contribution surrounds the topic extremely well, great job! You get another 10 for the article being neutral and for timeliness. Awesome work overall.Meyekel Wik (talk) 22:51, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
2. Mariah, wow. You did an amazing job on your contribution. I don’t have anything really negative to say since you hit everything spot on, but please remember to not put it any personal ideas since some people may say it is biased, like in the last sentence when you hint how Dunbar’s Creole Cuisine is a hot spot in Gert Town and attracts many people from far and wide. You get a 10 for your contribution being well-written, verifiable, broad, and for it being completed in a timely manner. I must give you an 8 though for your contribution being neutral since it you sound a little bit biased in the last sentence. Overall, I am very impressed, great job.Meyekel Wik (talk) 23:06, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
3. Halanni, I apologize. I cannot critique your article since it appears as if it hasn't been submitted on the same page as the others. Although, I can say you get 4 points for the timeliness of your contribution.Meyekel Wik (talk) 23:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
4. Geo- (N/A) Meyekel Wik (talk) 23:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
1. Halanni: I can't seem to find your contribution on the draft page. I'll have to give you a 4 since I'm not sure if you have or haven't submitted anything yet. Geo: I really like your article. You get straight to the point and understand how to wrote effectively. From my eyes, there's only two things that I see could be a problem. In your first paragraph, the summary, you used the phrase "The article" a lot. You don't really need to address what the article says because you are simply stating its contents in Wikipedia. The citation link thingy will tell the reader that where you based your information from. What I'm trying to say is that it'e redundant. Just summarize you contribution and add the citation at the end of it. Secondly, I realized that your last paragraph is one big quote. Summarize that quote in your own words. All in all, I give you a 8 for well written; 10 for verifiable; 10 for broad; 10 for neutral; and another 10 for timeliness. Izhayia: Your contribution is okay. I feel like there can me some more information about The Waldo Burton Memorial Boys Home. I just feels a little short, but if that is all the information that you can find, then just kidding. Your language can some a pick me up. I feel that since your article is short, you can really use dynamic language and sentence structure to engage the reader. Lastly, the last sentence would be considered a personal opinion, I'd take that out. Overall, I'll give you an 8 for well written; 8 for verifiable since there seems to be only one citation and there could be more unless you couldn't find more information; 10 for broad; 8 for neutral; and 10 for timeliness.Mariah Nicole McDaniel 17:53, 14 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariah McD (talk • contribs)
1. Geo: I really liked the structure of your article. I liked how you used quotes and explained your topic in depth. There is also no bias in your draft. I would give you a 10 in all categories. 2. Halanni: I guess your draft isn't in there so I guess I have to give you a 4. 3. Mariah: Great explanation of the restaurant and the history of it. You are very neutral to the topic. You also have a lot of evidence on the restaurant. I would give you a 10 in all categories. Izhayia- (N/A) ifuller (talk) 1:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)