User talk:Annamberg07/sandbox

Peer Review

Thoughts on FIFA section before edits: First paragraph contains valid content, but lacks any citations. Maybe look into finding a source for that information.

Part about field quality could be more concise. (which you edited well)

It could be explained more why FIFA World Cup is used as an example among other sports tournaments that exercise gender gaps in pay (ex. PGA vs LPGA) Mcadden (talk) 17:24, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on edits:

I agree with Shedden's comment that the two sections could be combined to provide more of a comparison. I liked how you did this for the difference in viewing rates between men's and women's soccer.

Maybe work on paraphrasing the long quote you have included. Mcadden (talk) 16:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review #2

The changes you've made so far make a huge difference! I really appreciate the removal of language such as "nice and soft" and "these tiny rubber balls."

I see that you are already planning on rewriting the introduction to this section, so here are some specific thoughts on that:

Remove "it's" because conjunctions are generally viewed as unprofessional
Phrase the parts about "there needs to be a change" in a way that better represents that this is a viewpoint. Things like "Many argue that change is necessary..." Although most would agree that the need for change is obvious, it still makes the article appear biased

I would also consider adding the phrase "by contrast" or something similar in the second paragraph, in order to highlight the differences in pay between the men and the women.

Overall you have made some significant improvements to this section and I am sure that once you rewrite the parts you are planning on rewriting it will be great. Cawalker18 (talk) 17:44, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]