User talk:Nzacharis/new sandbox

Cody's peer review

You can include her invention and focus in the lead paragraph. Chronologically, you can put Education before Life and Career. But in terms of importance, Life and Career should be placed on the top. Each section is independent and easy to read. There is no redundant information. Now the part of her career was emphasized. The article states a lot of facts and no arguments. Since the subject may not be controversial, there may not be multiple viewpoints. The article is objective and clear. But it only focuses on her achievements. Maybe you can include some comments from other people if applicable. One of the sources is a website of the prize from an organization. I'm not sure if this is reliable as it may be similar to a company's website. You can add a citation in the first paragraph of Life and Career for clarification. Overall, it's great. Codysheng000617 (talk) 17:59, 11 July 2019 (UTC)Cody Sheng

Miguel's Peer Review

The lead is really concise and explicit on Mrs. Hamburger accomplishments.

I think including more information on her personal life and childhood would be interesting to give a broader sense of who she was. Also, it would give more credibility to know her place of death.

It would be beneficial to have information on specifics of her major inventions. What were the applications of her radio receptor? What did she discover with her research? When did she leave the military? What hierarchical level of prestigious did she reach there?

The "Legacy" paragraph is really good. It successfully passes the idea that she impacted society and deserves to be remembered. Maybe you could more information on how she advocated for higher education during life. Also, the sentence "Shortly after her death" seems a bit unrelated to the article since you haven't commented on her death- we don't know when or how that happened. The table with the Laureates also looks really nice.

Overall, the article is really well structured and has the major information you would spect to find in a Wikipedia article. However, digging into specifics in the topics I commented above would give more content and, hence, strengthen it.

When it comes to citations, you have a pretty solid book and three additional references that wouldn't add that much. I think you should try to get at least two more solid sources.