Jump to content

User talk:Mgattoni

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

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, Mgattoni, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam 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
  • You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review #1

[edit]

The picture added looks great and the caption is clean and precise. Maybe change the wording after The CrossFit Games “is”, to The CrossFit Games “are” in the opening. The third sentence of the first paragraph caught my attention, reading “only” hours beforehand, this is not giving a neutral point of view. The same sentence is also long and a period could be used halfway through. Citation is also needed for quotes in the last sentence.

Sources could be improved since some are news based and more could be added because there is a lot of information on the page; specifically the history section could use more reliable sources to back up what is written. However, I can understand how it is hard to find scholarly articles on the topic, it is fairly new!

I think the structure is appropriate and is laid out well. The information is straightforward however the lead mentions history and not popularity. You also could mention where the CrossFit Games take place in the lead paragraph, or in other words where did it originate from. Maybe in the history section discuss if it is only held in the U.S. or if other countries hold their own version of it, and is there a reward? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bking22 (talkcontribs) 22:55, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review #1

[edit]

The Lead Section I think is a great introduction, however there needs to be more citations. Much of the content has a lack of citation making it not as credible as the rest of the page. I think it sets up the rest of the page very well. The next section " History" I think could be organized better. It should incorporate the complete history of the games, meaning how the games started and even how Crossfit started/who started it. I think you have a lot of important facts in it but maybe not enough true history. I think the sections are organized well have a good balance of information. All of the references are appropriate. There a great neutral and informational tone to this article. I think the popularity section is really good because it shows the growth of the sport, but I think it could definitely be added on with more information on where it started to the most recent games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cassie909 (talkcontribs) 02:14, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review #2

[edit]

The Lead Section: The lead section is short and to the point, giving a very vague overview of what the CrossFit Games are, it does not report the most important information, it is just a quick background to give the reader a general idea of the topic before the article dives in.

Structure: The sections are definitely organized well, going from the intro into the history and the popularity of the sport, then breaking down the champions of the games since it began in 2007. I feel this is the best order.

Balance: Maybe the article could go a little more about the games themselves, it gives an overview but not necessarily examples of what the games actually are. There is nothing off topic in the article.

Neutral: The article is neutral in tone, it is all based on pure facts about the history and the growth of the popularity of the sport, there isn't any claims based off opinion.

Sources: The sources are all solid, from reputable magazines, databases, and other websites, all from the period of 2011-2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbartlett16 (talkcontribs) 23:27, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]