User talk:Hadford/sandbox

This is an amazing article, and I am struggling to find any points of critique. You have a strong lead, strong sources, and a great depth and breadth of knowledge on the subject. I am so impressed by the work you have done, and I wouldn't change anything. Maybe add some pictures? Awesome job! Teagan999 (talk) 07:25, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review By Ruquia Rubaiet

Your wiki page looks very clean and neat and very well organized. The background information about Judith Plaskow has enough information to get a sense of who she is and her overall theme of work. You've given enough time and information for her background as well and well explained. Maybe touch base on her how works are effective and her approach in society has made an impact. Other than that, maybe add one or two pictures because everything else look well researched and well put! RuquiaRubaiet (talk) 05:24, 8 November 2019 (UTC)RuquiaRubaiet/sandbox

Peer Review by Ashlyn Osborne

Lead: Good lead! Content: Some of the sentences are a little long and could be separated into two sentences to make it more clear and concise. Tone and Balance: Good neutral tone. Sources and Reference: One area that could possibly use some work is the last section on "Legacy of Standing Again at Sinai: Judaism from a Feminist Perspective" where you could maybe add some citations and possibly reference other Wikipedia pages. In that section, there is a lot of information, but no citations. Organization: Good organization, but there could be more sections added. Maybe delve into what impact she had on other feminist works or movements. Images and Media: Maybe add some pictures, but not necessary. Overall: This seems like a very well developed article. Good job! Miss.Ashlyn (talk) 19:31, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Peer Revew: Breanna Palmer

I like the page you have created so far with the sections and citations. I am not sure how to get that to do the same on mine! :) I do like the new sections that you created in italics- also in some of the information that was borrowed from lecture and peer reviewed/already published sources as I know that they do not allow original research. I wonder perhaps about some images or links to creative sites, otherwise I think this looks like an interesting and more accurate wiki! Breannapalmer (talk) 21:55, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback. Note: This article has received four peer reviews.

This is absolutely wonderful. Thank you so much for providing such an exemplary piece of work. The only thing that you definitely need to do for the second draft is to address the broader narrative level, namely how and where in one of the larger sections (e.g. History of Feminism, but it doesn’t have to be that one) are you going to insert her, as a way to increase her visibility?

But you might want to do a couple of other things as well.

Rubaiet suggested that you say something about the impact and I think one way to do that is to follow up on the Lilith midrash that I am having you read, that is the reception and influence of that midrash. This might help at least contextualize that: Walton, Rivkah M. "LILITH'S DAUGHTERS, MIRIAM'S CHORUS: TWO DECADES OF FEMINIST MIDRASH." Religion & Literature 43, no. 2 (2011): 115-27. www.jstor.org/stable/23347034.

You might wish to include some criticism, e.g.: Klein, Thalia Gur. “On Feminist Propensity: Anti-Judaism in Plaskow’s Reading of Hebrew Texts; a Contra-Reading. .” Feminist Theology: The Journal of the Britain & Ireland School of Feminist Theology 17, no. 2 (January 2009): 254–60. doi:10.1177/0966735008098727.

Again, great job! --FeliceLifshitz (talk) 02:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)FeliceLifshitz