User talk:Huerndy/sandbox
Leann's peer review
[edit]Informing users that digitized microfilms of Hyde's Notebooks are available online is helpful for researchers and those who want to learn more about John Hyde's work. I thought this was a great addition to the lead. Looking through your edits, it looks like you originally added that information under Notebook's History but later moved it to the lead. Editing outdated information is a great contribution to this article. Prior to your edit, readers may have thought those digitized images were still not released. I did notice that in the current version of the article, it still says that the digitized images have not been released though. Is this because two different collections are talked about? If not, it would be helpful for users to know that those objects were still not digitized in 2014 but perhaps you could rephrase that by saying something like "until 2019, the images were not digitized".
I saw that you edited the number of volumes from 58 to 74. I would maybe add another citation to that sentence to include your information source.
Your shorthand section is another good contribution. I would only suggest possibly making this a sub-heading under Hyde's Notebooks rather than a heading on its own. Other than that, the article is structured very well.
Overall, I think your contributions have really helped to improve this article. The article reads neutral and you added images which really enhance the content of the article as a whole.
Nice work!
Lea.E.Kel (talk) 22:00, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Edited, thanks!