Jump to content

User talk:Louis Patterson476/sandbox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Houdini was a pretty sweet guy[1]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ huba, smuckermen (234). hubla bubla. New York: stevie nicks. pp. 22–22222. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)

Comments on First Draft

[edit]

Louis Patterson476, this is a good summary of the main issues affecting fatherhood in the interwar period in Canada. It's well focused and includes relevant and reliable sources. I think to edit, you could elaborate in a few places, and provide the reader with more context. What was the impact of WWI on Canadian men (we can't assume readers know). You could also link to the page about Canadian soldiers in WWI. What was the specific impact of the Depression on Canadian men? What were unemployment rates, for example? I can lend you a book that argues that domestic violence, despair and suicide all increased during the 1930s in Canada -- it's Kristina Srigley's Breadwinning Daughters.

Also, beware of writing in an essay style. Write as if you were talking, explaining a topic to someone. Your first sentence is a bit vague - what kind of imposed change to you mean? Was there legislative changes imposed? Or was this more of a cultural shift? As you say, there was a difference between the idealized father and the behaviour of men.

Keep at it! This is looking good. Cliomania (talk) 04:42, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Louis Patterson476, your article is really well summarized. Some of your sentences do feel quite long mainly because the majority of them contain lists. If possible, you might benefit from breaking these up because they can be a little confusing and wordy. Considering that you do use lists a lot in your section, I believe it may be standard practice to use the Oxford comma which requires a comma after the last item before and before the and. Other than that, your grammar and spelling is sound.

I do agree with Cliomania, I think you make to many assumptions about what the reader will know. Most people go to Wikipedia as their first step so it may be safe to assume you should not assume (ironically). Moreover, you do need to elaborate a little more. Your section does seem fairly short and does repeat the need for fathers to be financially responsible at least three times, sometimes back to back. Cliomania's ideas for expanding would for sure strengthen your overall section.

The sentence: "Furthermore, expectations on fathers; and the actual practices of fathers were often different." I am not to sure if the semi-colon is supposed to be there? Perhaps just revise that, I very well could be wrong. Good work! Aplin33 (talk) 07:42, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Aplin33[reply]