User talk:Shraddhapandey2021/sandbox

Hi there! Your evaluation of articles looks great, but you need to choose one article for your Area instead of several, is that correct? Tips: -which article relates the most to your PE org? -which article has the most room for development? (e.g. a stub article)

Lastly, you can edit as many articles as you please (I encourage it). Just let me know which one you end up going with for your Wikipedia assignment. -Momo Sumomox4nouchi (talk) 22:55, 7 February 2019 (UTC)sumomox4nouchi

References Section

Hi! Sandbox is looking good, but missing "References" section at the very bottom. -Momo Sumomox4nouchi (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2019 (UTC)sumomox4nouchi

Emilie's Peer Review

Hi! Right off the bat I am impressed with your Wiki page. Your drafting is specifically nice as I read through and can follow your own thought process as you draft.

What you will add and plan to take out is smartly done. I notice that you are thinking about removing a sentence with gender inequality; I see why you wish to remove that sentence but I would also consider a way to still include how women are at an increased risk. Big move thinking of removing a whole paragraph! In this sentence "For example, the slums of West African nations such as Liberia were crippled by as well as contributed to the outbreak and spread of Ebola in 2014." is worded in a confusing way (unless I am just understanding it wrong).

Adding a new section for your Sector is another big move! Maybe add a reference to this sentence as I questioned where this information came from when I was reading: "For example, in parts of India, public facilities offer free treatment for tuberculosis, yet many slum residents choose to visit expensive private healthcare facilities due to lack of awareness of this program."

Overall, great work. Hopefully I was able to help at least a little bit.

Emilieyoungs (talk) 10:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)Emilieyoungs

Haley's Peer Review

Area

All your edits in the first paragraph are great! The paragraph you struckthrough is absolute nonsense how was that ever published. Otherwise, all your edits are great! You're concise, neutral, encyclopedic, and add meaningful information to the article! Good job!

Sector

"organizations have approached this problem in a multitude of different ways." Small suggestion: if you use "a multitude" you should list a couple more approaches. If you want to break the approaches into two categories (structural and education), add more structural approaches besides just water sanitation, or just change "a multitude" to "several".

Everything else is great! It's neutral and encyclopedic, I'd say you got this whole wikipedia thing down!

Haleykolus (talk) 17:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Response to Peer Review

-Both Haley and Emilie seemed supportive of my idea of editing the first part of the Sector Article.They both think that I could maybe add even more edits to the ones I have already made to the original article, in order to fix wording or structure. -Haley pointed out that I could get rid of some generalizations in my first introductory statement by pulling some more evidence from my sources. If I say that there are a "multitude" of approaches, I should be comfortable elaborating further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shraddhapandey2021 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)