User talk:Juspeck006/sandbox
Evaluation
[edit]- Points: 2
- Grade: C
Spelling/Grammar
[edit]Meets Expectations
Language
[edit]Meets Expectations This edit is a little dry. It reads almost like just a list of facts, rather than a smooth explanation.
Organization
[edit]Meets Expectations
Coding
[edit]Meets Expectations
Validity
[edit]Meets Expectations
Completion
[edit]Nearly Meets Expectations There isn't a clear purpose for this paragraph, other than listing roadways in Verona.
Relevance
[edit]Nearly Meets Expectations With little information about how this connects to Verona as a city, its sort of lacking.
Sources
[edit]Nearly Meets Expectations
Citations
[edit]Exceeds Expectations Only two citations from the reference list are in the paragraph.
References
[edit]Doesn't Meet Expectations There are three reference numbers, but only two references. ==10/17/18 Evaluation by Emilenelson (talk) 16:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
11/4/2018 Evaluation by User:Meganly
[edit]Grade: A/B
Spelling/Grammar
[edit]Exceeds Expectations This seems like a clean and thorough edit, grammatically.
Language
[edit]Meets Expectations
Organization
[edit]Exceeds Expectations You articulate what you are talking about in a clear and concise manner. Paragraphs are structurally sound and informative and seem to come from a neutral stance.
Coding
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Validity
[edit]Exceeds Expectations Your efforts in attempting this subject in a neutral and informative style is impressive, especially considering the timeliness on the financial sector. That could not have been easy.
Completion
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Relevance
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Sources
[edit]Exceeds Expectations I see that you have more than the required 10 sources. They look legitimate and that they are cited correctly.
Citations
[edit]Good I think you do a great job at citing your work, overall. I expected to see more citations happening within the third paragraph in regards to Large Corporations. You may want to work a little on that. You also need significant citation work in your edit on the Port of Amsterdam.
References
[edit]Meets Expectations The only thing I might add, in conclusion, is that the way in which you have set up your edit, I cannot tell what is original work and what you have added upon. I would need to go back and forth with the main page which I may do at a later date...Or is it all original?
Evaluation
[edit]Evaluation
[edit]- Points: 4
- Grade: A
Spelling/Grammar
[edit]Meets Expectations
Language
[edit]Meets Expectations A few sentences could use some re-wording or be combined just to flow better
Organization
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Coding
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Validity
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Completion
[edit]Exceeds Expectations Excellent information
Relevance
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Sources
[edit]Exceeds ExpectationsGreat sources
Citations
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
References
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
==1/24/2018 Evaluation by Emilenelson (talk) 16:57, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
12/2/2018 Evaluation by User:Meganly
[edit]Spelling/Grammar
[edit]Exceeds Expectations This seems like a clean and thorough edit, grammatically, for a rough draft. A couple grammatical errors I found were in the last paragraph, "inclue noise and air polution" (d needed in "include" and 2 L's in pollution). Also, I am not familiar with the word, "extranalities" and it looks like spell check isn't either. I know with some subject matter, these new terms pop up, so that is why I am hesitant in critiquing your use. I wonder if you meant, "externality" (but see how spell check doesn't like that either)?
Language
[edit]Exceeds Expectations You inform your audience in a neutral, non biased tone.
Organization
[edit]Exceeds Expectations I thought the way in which you formed the outline of this edit was clear, concise, and helpful in understanding the points you would be making in this edit. You articulate what you are talking about in a clear and concise manner. Paragraphs are structurally sound and informative. *I would consider reworking or expounding on the second paragraph which discusses "Terminology" used to distinguish individuals from different ethnic backgrounds. "Terminology" is capitalized, which informs the reader of its importance, so I had hoped to hear more about what that terminology is or looks like in the context of these immigrants. Or perhaps you can link it to a Wiki that discusses this terminology? The follow up information isn't clear in its relationship to the Terminology, in my opinion.
Coding
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Validity
[edit]Exceeds Expectations I thought that your use of the information that we have learned over the course of this term and then applied to this assignment was smart and made for a fascinating and informative read.
Completion
[edit]Exceeds Expectations You have the required amount of content for this assignment. It is executed well and informative.
Relevance
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Sources
[edit]Exceeds Expectations I see that you have more than the required 20 sources. They look legitimate and that they are cited correctly (no icky red marks).
Citations
[edit]Exceeds Expectations You do a great job at citing all statements, statistics, and information. The last paragraph, "The City of Verona has partnered with public and private companies over the years to address the cities growing infrastructure demands. These partnerships have aimed to reduce many of the negative extranalities that have arisen due to increase in traffic. Such extranalities inclue noise and air polution as well as traffic congestion.[32]" has only the one citation at the end. Is this simply because all of the information was from this one source?
References
[edit]Exceeds Expectations
Evaluation
[edit]- Points: 37
- Grade: C
Spelling/Grammar
[edit]Meets Expectations Since its the final edit, I think I have to get picky with things cause overall its really good. In the first paragraph there should be an "a" before diverse ethnic background, and then possibly "of Turkish descent" rather than background. A few things are missing capitals on title of stuff.
Language
[edit]Meets Expectations
Organization
[edit]Meets Expectations Possibly move the statistic in the first section to their own section titled statistics and throw some other ones in there?
Coding
[edit]Almost meets Expectations It needs its own sandbox page. With the old posts on there it makes it a little confusing. Especially with the sources and the contents page at the top.
Validity
[edit]Meets Expectations
Completion
[edit]Almost meets Expectations I feel like there could be more information. I know you dont have all your sources up yet though.
Relevance
[edit]Meets Expectations
Sources
[edit]Almost meets Expectations not all sources
Citations
[edit]Meets Expectations
References
[edit]meets Expectations
==12/03/2018 Evaluation by Emilenelson (talk) 05:42, 3 December 2018 (UTC)