User talk:Caranlee/sandbox

Adding more detail about the fetishism (and maybe connecting that to a psychological disorder) could help enrich the section. Maybe go into more detail on the intrigue that these dolls come with. Maddywright (talk) 00:02, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you should add dates like when it started or when it went on for the West African Fetish Magic. That would give the reader a better sense of the scope and context. Samwolff450 (talk) 02:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like you could tie together the psychological effects of haunted dolls and horror movies together in the psychology section. It would allow the reader to gain a better understanding with how haunted dolls scare people in popular culture and movies. --Ghurley1 (talk) 02:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would change the wording for "creeped out" because it could sound informal. Also, more dates could be added. When were Europeans wary of dolls? When did McAndrew complete his research? Some internal links could possibly be added. Mtatherton18 (talk) 14:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think overall you did a great job! In the "Psychology" section, I would add some more internal links in so that the reader can better understand what you are speaking to. Also, I would add a few sentences in when you are writing about fetishism, just to help the reader understand how it connects. Montananelson (talk) 14:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good. For the psychology part I remember reading something about ambiguity and anxiety and the uncanny valley (I'm pretty sure there is a wikipedia article on it), but you would probably need an external source to say this too. Just an interesting thought you could look into if you wanted. Also, I think history section could be more diverse. I think other people are doing examples of dolls too so that will be good. Mlazarus14 (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the first paragraph I would dive directly into the African dolls and leave the definition of fetishism later in the text not as an introductory sentence. Also try changing passive voice to active and add who carries the action out add credibility to your article. Barborale (talk) 17:06, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have a good amount of sources for the amount of content you are working with. Good separation of the headings and paragraphs. Charlieaabrams (talk) 18:07, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overall you did great! One thing I think you should look into and change is "West Africa" in a particular group of people who follow this worshiping because the region has different people with different beliefs. 1oromo (talk) 19:53, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think this a really good start my one suggestion would be to add a bit more description in the psychology section to add more context. Larainal (talk) 17:59, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The second sentence in the Early History paragraph is a bit of a run on so maybe try editing that. Sallyfried (talk) 18:32, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources are great, however, i think you could tie everything in together better and it would be perfectDougsitt (talk) 03:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]