User talk:AngelicaLB/sandbox

Hi Angelica! First, something I noticed that I think is good is that you go into lots of good detail for people and range of topics, instead of just glossing over the people involved and that the journal covers many topics. I think this really helps give people an understanding of the journal and it's contents. Something that could be added to as a way to improve the article is including more information on the past editors - there may not be as much information on some as there are others, but it might be interesting and helpful especially since you give background of the founders and current editor. Another update that can be made (which can be done when you are finishing up) is hyperlinking words in the article that someone may need defined, for example the topics you list, occupations some of the people have, and other pieces that people might not be so familiar with. Overall I think this looks good and you have some good information! It looks like your sources are pretty good, as many come from journals, and I think the structure of the draft looks good too (though it looks like you are editing an existing article so that could change which is okay). The tone seems fairly neutral and is steady throughout. Just make sure that every fact you state is cited, like when you state where Coleman is currently a professor. Looks good! Mtjames20 (talk) 20:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your input! I will be adding Hyperlinks as you suggested as well as adding topics/fields of study for the past editors if available! [AngelicaLB] — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngelicaLB (talk • contribs) 18:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)