User talk:Sasha-urban/sandbox

Evaluations for Antwerp (Edit 1)(since removed)

4/24/2019 Evaluation by KStein91

• Points: 39/40
• Grade: 98%

Spelling/Grammar

Exceeds standard: great job!

Language

Exceeds standard: great professional tone throughout.

Organization

Exceeds standard: easy to read and follow.

Coding

Exceeds standard: looks great!

Validity

Nearly meets standard: I am concerned that your sources are from websites and newspapers and not peer reviewed sources.

Completion

Meets standard: looks great, again though make sure your sources are non-biased.

Relevance

Meets standard: looks good.

Sources

Nearly meets the standard: again concerned about your sources, refer back to comments under validity.

Citation

Meets standard: well used citations.

References

Nearly meets the standard: once again, concerned about your quality of your sources. See validity and sources for other comments.

5/4/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright

DrMichaelWright (talk) 13:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

There really is some good material here, and I see that you've also put it on Wikipedia proper. I hope you'll take my feedback here and implement the slight adjustments on the live Wikipedia page.

• Points: 37.5/40
• Grade: 93.75%

Spelling/Grammar

Meets standard.

Language

Meets standard.

• "... and even experienced a second boom..." A little less superlative language would fit Wikipedia's encyclopedic style just a little better.
• The word 'however' in your second-to-last sentence does not seem to refer to the preceding sentence about the AWDC, but to the ups and downs of the market, which you write into place earlier in the paragraph.

Organization

Meets standard. I added some headers for port and diamonds to Wikipedia proper.

Coding

Meets standard.

Validity

Nearly meets standard.

• "85 percent of the world's..." your source says 84%.
• "Antwerp's history in the diamond trade dates back to as early as the sixteenth century,[1] with the first diamond cutters guild being introduced in 1584." Your source says 1447, which is the fifteenth century.
• You mention 'recent years' referencing a source from 2006, which is longer ago than 'recent years'. That may not mean that this assessment is invalid, but it's hard to really know without more up-to-date information.

Completion

Meets standard. The actual added material is a little thin, but just enough to pass muster.

Relevance

Meets standard.

Sources

Exceeds standard. There are some really wonderful sources here!

Citations

Nearly meets standard.

• "Antwerp's history in the diamond trade dates back to as early as the sixteenth century,[1] with the first diamond cutters guild being introduced in 1584.[4]" Why is a citation placed in the middle of the sentence, rather than at the end of it? The two sources you mention also seem to contradict, see validity, above. I also notice that you did not put that citation in the live Wikipedia version.
• The two sentences after it are not supported with citations, nor does that information appear to be in the preceding citation. So, where is this information coming from? I'm guessing from the Hofmeester article.

References

Nearly meets standard.

• A very minor nitpick is that your Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article is actually from the New York Times, syndicated to the Post-Gazette. Just going with the NYT article would have been just slightly better. You could have even taken the citation from note #2 on the Antwerp diamond district article.
• A number of your references draw on specific bits of information from large texts. That makes it difficult to see where your information is coming from without wading through those texts. Page or paragraph numbers (for non-paginated sources) are very valuable in this respect.

Evaluations for Turin (Edit 2)

5/15/2019 Evaluation by Npearso2

• Points: 32/40
• Grade: 80%

Spelling/Grammar

Meets expectations

Language

Meets expectations

Organization

Nearly meets standard: The last paragraph has events in 2015, then in the 1980s. Consider rearranging some of your text to reflect the correct timeline.

Coding

Meets standard: The links to other pages work and are appropriately placed.

Validity

Meets standard: The content itself seems relevant to the page.

Completion

Nearly complete: Some of your sections are quite small. It makes it seem like there is information missing.

Relevance

Nearly meets standard: The bit about FIAT seems out of place for this section on food and doesn't give much context.

Sources

Meets standard: Your sources seem valid and appropriate. I don't feel that the New York Times is a high-quality source, but most of your other sources are high-quality from peer-reviewed journals.

Citation

Meets standard.

References

Nearly meets standard: Your last citation is incomplete, lacking the title of the article.

5/16/2019 Evaluation by ElainaDH

Spelling/Grammar

Few errors, if any.

Language

Writing is clear and straightforward. Good work

Organization

Here is where you could do more work. I would start in a more general way, expanding on the first sentence. The chocolate discussion should be further down into the section.

Coding

Looks great to me.

Validity

Your sources all look appropriate for the website

Completion

There are gaps in the information. I know it is still a work in progress. It is interesting to read. That the city is trying to brand itself as a center of food should be supported with more examples. More general information about the food culture would round out the article.

Relevance

The information about the farmers markets, how the city is trying to become a center of food tourism is relevant. Some of the details aren't yet as relevant as they could be.

Sources

Look good

Citation

Are all very good

References

Good format!

5/17/2019 Evaluation by KStein91

• Points: 40.5/40

Spelling/Grammar

Exceeds standard: great job!

Language

Meets standard: great professional tone throughout, thanks for noting the preexisting text.

Organization

Exceeds standard: easy to read and follow.

Coding

Exceeds standard: looks great!

Validity

Meets standard: looks like some solid information.

Completion

Meets standard: looks great, easy to follow.

Relevance

Meets standard: looks good.

Sources

Nearly meets standard: good job finding some solid sources.

Citation

Meets standard: well used citations, throughout.

References

Meets standard: good job using the Wikipedia citation tool.

5/30/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright

DrMichaelWright (talk) 11:49, 30 May 2019 (UTC) Wonderful!!

• Points: 40.5/40
• Grade: 101.25%

Spelling/Grammar

Meets standard.

• '...some time...' should be sometime, or omitted altogether since it is so inspecific.

Language

Nearly meets standard.

• "...in the economy today" sounds too conversational and/or iffy on the timeliness.
• Use of present tense where past tense is required: "By 2014, the cultural sector employed 6.6% of the province's workers and generates." should be 'generated
• "One of the things the Turin is known for is chocolate" comes after "Turin is well known for its farmers markets." Perhaps "Another thing Turin is known for is chocolate," would fit a little better.
• Fiat is not normally written in all caps, even if it is an acronym. In this context, it may also be useful to direct the reader to an earlier part of the page, e.g. "After the decline of Fiat(see above), Turin has..." Of course, that calls into question the degree to which this is accurate information (see below).
• "... thanks to..." is not neutral language. Perhaps 'due to' would be better here.

Organization

Meets standard. When it's said and done, I think that the paragraph on chocolate might deserve a subheader under this section, but maybe if another sub-section is also more fleshed out.

Coding

Meets standard. There is a problem in the Berghaus reference, but you clearly shine in your otherwise sophisticated use of code.

Validity

Meets standard. I think you might be making too much of Fiat Chrystler's global HQ being in London. Fiat, the daughter company, is still headquartered in Turin. Does one of your sources argue that Fiat has declined? It seems like your source is not so much saying that Fiat declined as in that Turin has rebranded itself in order to get out of Fiat's industrial shadow.

Completion

Meets standard.

Relevance

Meets standard.

Sources

Exceeds standard. These are superb!

Citations

Exceeds standard. The more specific citations, with the more complex code, are phenomenal!

References

Exceeds standard.

Evaluations for Odessa (Edit 3)

06/09/2019 Evaluation by User:Elaina DH

Spelling/Grammar

you can edit out the extra punctuation, and the awkward wording throughout. It reads like the rough draft it is.

Language

I found it straightforward and interesting to read. You could start each section of without having to say ... has a history in Odessa.

Organization

The organization makes sense. The sub-heading, Christianity, ought to stand out more.

Coding

looks good

Validity

seems good to me.

Completion

You could balance out the long and very interesting section on Judiasm with a little more about the other religions.

Relevance

Good

Sources

Most of your sources are the kind we are expected to use, but some are less so. It must be difficult to find 20.

Citation

You should use the same style of citations throughout

References

One is not a citation, must be an error (# 16).

06/09/2019 Evaluation by Npearso2

• Points: 30/40
• Grade: 75%

Spelling/Grammar

Nearly meets standard. There are several instances of excessive comma usage and wordy sentences. The last sentence in the Orthodoxy section is a bit run on.

Language

Nearly meets standard. The tone is not very encyclopedic at times. The first paragraph introduction is especially awkward. You write "furthermore" then the next sentence is "on the other hand." I would suggest reworking this and removing the "furthermore."

Organization

Meets standard. Overall, the organization makes sense. There is one sentence at the end of the Protestantism section about Pentecostals that it out of place in both timeline and section organization.

Coding

Meets standard. The hyperlinks to other pages work and are relevant.

Validity

Meets standard: Most of the content is solid.

Completion

Does not meet standard. You have a disproportionate amount of information on Judaism and Orthodoxy in this edit. The smaller sections feel very incomplete in the historical aspect and are virtually nonexistent in the present day relevance.

Relevance

Nearly meets standard. Some content seems irrelevant. The detail of pogroms in the Jewish history section is disproportionate to the amount of detail in the other sections. For example, I do not see the relevance of mentioning the "Odessa Tales."

Sources

Nearly meets standard. Some of your sources are high quality academic sources but it appears that about half are low quality or tertiary sources. I would not consider NPR or the Huffington Post to be high quality sources. A few of the sources are also websites that do not appear reliable/valid.

Citation

Does not meet standard. Not all claims have associated citations. Citations also appear to be a mixture of MLA and APA format.

References

Does not meet standard: Source 16 does not work. The citation itself sources a download page without information on the source document. It is unclear what this source is based on the reference entry. The format of entries is inconsistent, as I have mentioned previously.

6/11/2019 Evaluation by KStein91

Spelling/Grammar

Standard: looks good but agree with our peers that some sentences appear to run on.

Language

Standard: looks good

Organization

Standard: looks good, however the blank heading of Christianity is distracting, it looks like you wanted to add information but didn't.

Coding

Standard: everything looks good, except I think something happened to your sources. It appears there are some stray numbers by many of your references that don't link to your references. I know that you are out of country, but I hope that you can fix or remove those extra numbers. I like your table and the pictures your included.

Validity

Standard: I like the information that you included, looks good and well researched.

Completion

Standard: lots of information on the Orthodoxy and Judaism, however I don't know why you included the heading of Christianity without any information below it, makes the article look unfinished. Or was the heading supposed to read "Orthodoxy Christianity".

Relevance

Standard: appears to be relevant but my concerns are listed in organization/completion, some of your article looks unfinished because of the lack of information included.

Sources

Standard: I know it hard to find 20 sources that make sense to use when writing these articles. It appears that you have found some good creditable sources for your information but also have some sources that may have bias.

Citation

Standard: looks complete but as other peers have said it appears that some claims are not backed up with sources such as the claim that

References

Standard: however, I see that the link to 16 is still not a source. It is accept the terms and agreements to JSTOR. This was also mentioned by other peers. I know that you are out to country now though.

6/17/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright

DrMichaelWright (talk) 20:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

This is so well done! I hope you integrate it onto the Odessa page, with a couple of tweaks (see below).

• Points: 41.5/40
• Grade: 103.75%

Spelling/Grammar

Meets standard.

• "...and one monastery in the city..." insert 'left' after monastery.
• "In 1824, Italian architect Francesco Boffo built..." 'In 1824,the Italian architect...' sounds a bit nicer.

Language

Meets standard.

• "...came under trial,..." is a strange phrase. Could you make this clearer?

Organization

Meets standard.

• It's best to have at least some paragraph under the 4th-level header 'Christianity'. Level 4 and 5 look so similar that the Christianity header just seems like it's a placeholder. Perhaps some paragraph that introduces the sections below it.
• Regarding the placement of your table. I think it's best right under the bit about the 19th century stuff, and above the 20th century material. That would also break up the preceding paragraph, which is a little on the long side.
• The Jewish History header is odd, because the other religions are just the names of the religion. Why should Judaism be treated differently?

Coding

Exceeds standard.

• Very well done!!

Validity

Meets standard.

Completion

Exceeds standard.

• Superb! with table and pictures.

Relevance

Meets standard.

Sources

Meets standard.

Citations

Exceeds standard.

• I really appreciate the special citations with page numbers.
• It's superb that you linked to specific parts of the The End of Jewish Odessa video!

References

Meets standard.

• You've done this fairly well. Here are some nit-picks, however.
• With the Herlihy reference:
  • It's great that you can offer the link to the Internet Archive. However, it still important to offer the book's original publication facts, which has the publisher=Harvard University Press|publication-place=Cambridge, MA. others= seems to be for people, not websites.
  • Also, there should not be spaces ahead of the colons.
• The 'Religious Information Service of Ukraine' websites should have been written out, rather than a near-url being used as the website name.
• Regarding the The Story of the Jews video, there are a number of problems.
  • The title is incomplete. The title of the video is Over the Rainbow, which is part 4 of the series: The Story of the Jews with Simon Schama
  • You should not put the name of the distributor (Alexander Street) in the title parameter.
  • There is a better template to use than the Template:cite web template. There is Template:Cite AV media. Unfortunately, it's not embedded in the Wikipedia editor, and you have to do it manually to use it. Like so: (I did not find it on Alexander Street.)

• I would have listed the speaker, Charles King, as the author of the U. of Michigan video, since the content stands on his reputation, and not that of the U. of Mich.
• Do not use ALL CAPS in references, except for acronyms.