User talk:Tmm113/sandbox

Feedback on article draft

Hi @Tmm113:, great job so far on your article draft! You got some good feedback from the others and I recommend that you consider their advice. The main thing I think would help is simply to polish your writing style for clairity. You want to make sure someone completely unfamiliar with boxing can understand the lede.

Another thing to do is to add your article to relevant categories. Finally, after you publish your article, you might add links to your article on other pages to help readers (and other editors) find it. I'm really excited to see how this develops! Groceryheist (talk) 05:44, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Groceryheist:, in this case where the previous writer had no citations or credible sources and I synthesized our writing, would it be okay to copy and paste what is in my sandbox into the article? I know Wikiedu advises against it.

Comment on article evaluation

Hi Tmm113, I have some comments on your article evaluation:

Good job noting that some of the sources were not accessible. This is a common problem that is difficult to address.
I also liked your observations that the article seems to have a positive slant.

Nice job :) Groceryheist (talk) 21:19, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

Hi Tmm113,

Nice job creating a detailed introduction to the article! I think you did a great job on finding the sources to make the concept of one-two combo become clearer to the readers. For your future work, I suggest that maybe you could find some examples of the one-two combo to enrich the content. Also, I noticed that some of the sources are a little out of date. Maybe you could find more sources from recent articles. Good Luck:) Shuyi, Xu

Alice0129 (talk) 03:08, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Khuynh96's Peer Review

Khuynh96 left his peer review at User_talk:Tmm113/New_sandbox. I pasted it here so you could have all the feedback in one place. Groceryheist (talk) 05:44, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your article is well written so far. Your intro is clear, and straightforward. There are relevant hyperlinks that will further support your article. The overall tone of this article is not too skewed or projecting your own biases into it. In other words, your article's tone is consistently neutral. I feel like you could expand on different types of punches, like you already did for #1 and #2.

Looking forward to see the final product!