User talk:Astrorocket2108
| This user is a student editor in Sam_Houston_State_University/NGLI_1101_Research_in_the_Digital_Age_(Fall_2018) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Astrorocket2108, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:42, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
kaleighs peer review
[edit]For your lead paragraph you could take out the info on the governor and focus more on the general topic of the article. You have a great statement showing when this was established. "On August 10, 1935 the formation of the Department of Public Safety along with 103 other bills were created by the Texas Legislature." So far your structure is great starting with the history of the Texas Department of Public Safety. You could possibly shorten the history a little bit maybe less elaboration on each bill. The article doesn't seem biased at all which is good. You have great facts in your rough draft. Just need some references. (Kaleighjohnson14 (talk) 18:51, 31 October 2018 (UTC))
chase's peer review
[edit]Your article is well balanced and i like that your information builds on each other as you go on throughout your article. the information in your article all pertains to what the article is over. once you add your cites and sources you will have a good article to submit. Keep up the good work!Texans 2018 (talk) 01:45, 6 November 2018 (UTC)Texans2018
Peer Review
[edit]your article is looking good, all the information is there and it's all relevant to the topic. none of your info seemed biased in any way. citations need to be added but other than that, everything's looking good. Bandit ellie17 (talk) 01:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC)Bandit ellie17
Peer Review
[edit]I really am impressed with your rough draft. I feel there is sufficient material and supporting facts. As well as a clear structure throughout the review, withholding neutral views. Your material progressively intertwines with one another, yet remains balanced. It appears you have plenty of reliable sources and information, providing dated facts. As mentioned before, some citations would probably be needed soon, but after that, I think it's pretty good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbaird99 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 6 November 2018 (UTC)