Jump to content

User talk:Christina geo/sandbox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

[edit]

Name of student reviewer: Paige Williams

Date of review: 5/14/13

Name of editor: User:Christina_geo

URL of editor’s Userpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User.Christina_geo/sandbox

Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page: 5/15/13

Date review submitted to instructor: 5/16/13

Length of edit (too long/too short): Great length

Image (needed/appropriate): No image

Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit): yes

Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed: yes

Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych): yes

Wikiformatting: yes

Grammar & composition: great

Other comments

— Preceding unsigned comment added by PAGETURNER22 (talkcontribs) 00:57, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Name of student reviewer: Sandra Jean-Baptiste

Date of review: 5/15/2013

Name of editor: User.Christina_geo

URL of editor’s Userpage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User.Christina_geo/sandbox

Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page: 5/14/2013

Date review submitted to instructor: 5/15/2013

Length of edit (too long/too short): It was ok

Image (needed/appropriate)Image not needed

Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit): Accurate

Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed: yes

Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych): Accurate

Wikiformatting: Correct Format

Grammar & composition: Good

Other comments — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Smjeanbaptiste (User:SmjeanbaptisteSpecial:Contributions/User:Smjeanbaptiste) 18:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

Name of student reviewer Wikipedia User:Joselv83
Date of review 5/16/2013
Name of editor Wikipedia User: Christina_geo
URL of editor’s Userpage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Christina_geo
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page 05/16/13
Date review submitted to instructor 05/16/13
Length of edit (too long/too short) Good Length.
Image (needed/appropriate) N/A
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) Accurate
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed N/A
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) N/A (Textbook article edit)
Wikiformatting Good Formatting.
Grammar & composition Good grammar.
Other comments Looks pretty good, good job! (Review for article edit)

Joselv83 (talk) 18:23, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

Name of student reviewer Wikipedia User:Joselv83
Date of review 5/15/2013
Name of editor Wikipedia User: Christina_geo
URL of editor’s Userpage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Christina_geo
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page 05/15/13
Date review submitted to instructor 05/15/13
Length of edit (too long/too short) Good Length.
Image (needed/appropriate) N/A
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) Accurate
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed N/A
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) Accurate to I/O Psych
Wikiformatting Good Formatting.
Grammar & composition Good grammar. Try switching "in which the leader is," with just "who." In the fourth line, maybe use "identifiable" instead of "identified."
Other comments Looks pretty good, good job!

Joselv83 (talk) 03:51, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-Edit Peer Review Feedback

Name of student Wikipedia User: Neffateriet
Date of review 5/15/2013
Name of editor Wikipedia User: Christina Geo
URL of editor’s Userpage Sandbox pre-edit URL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Christina_geo
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page 5/15/2013
Date review submitted to instructor 5/15/2013
Length of edit (too long/too short) Good length
Image (needed/appropriate) Not needed
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) The information provided was accurate from the text book
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed Yes
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) The article information was relevant to I/O Psych and was accurate from the textbook.
Wikiformatting Good overall job
Grammar & composition None that I find
Other comments Great job!!

Neffateriet (talk) 02:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Name of Student Reviewer Sandra Jean-Baptiste
Date of Review 5/15/13
Name of editor Christina GeoHaghan
URL of editor’s Userpage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:christina_geo/sandbox
URL of Wikipedia article
Reference page number in Schultz & Schultz 201-202
Permanent URL on PsycInfo of article
Item Points Points Earned
Evidence of posting ahead of the edit on the talk page 1 point 1
Signed post on talk page 1 point
Each response to questions on talk page 1 point
Sandbox with intended edit 1 point 1
Number of sentences in edit 1 point 1
Appropriate image in edit 1 point
Appropriate link to another Wikipedia page or external page 1 point 1
Textbook based reference information correct 1 point 1
Research article based reference information correct 1 point 1
Research article is empirical 1 point 1
Research article is peer-reviewed 1 point 1
Research article is primary 1 point 1
Reference and footnote formatted correctly 1 point 1
Each response on talk page after edit 1 point
Student made changes to article in response to editor comment 1 point
Each editor change to student’s edit minus 1 point
Fancy formatting (1 point for each up to 3 points for each: new section w/ heading; bulleted list; numbered list etc) 3 points 1
Total ------- 11

talk) 02:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Name of student Wikipedia User: Nae0408
Date of review 5/15/2013
Name of editor Wikipedia User: Christina Geo
URL of editor’s Userpage Sandbox pre-edit URL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Christina_geo
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page 5/15/2013
Date review submitted to instructor 5/15/2013
Length of edit (too long/too short) Good length
Image (needed/appropriate) N/A
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) The information was accurate
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed Yes
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) The article information was accurate to I/O Psych and from the textbook.
Wikiformatting Good job
Grammar & composition great grammar
Other comments Great job

Nae0408 (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Name of student Wikipedia User: Nikicia
Date of review May 16, 2013
Name of editor Wikipedia User: Christina Geo
URL of editor’s Userpage Sandbox pre-edit URL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Christina_geo
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page May 16, 2013
Date review submitted to instructor May 16, 2013
Length of edit (too long/too short) length is good
Image (needed/appropriate)
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) Accurate Information
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) It is accurate
Wikiformatting Good
Grammar & composition One very minor grammatical error
Other comments Good jobNikicia (talk) 04:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]




Name of student Wikipedia User: Mtrowers
Date of review 5/15/2013
Name of editor Wikipedia User: Christina Geo
URL of editor’s Userpage Sandbox pre-edit URL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Christina_geo
Date review posted on editor’s sandbox’s talk page 5/15/2013
Date review submitted to instructor 5/15/2013
Length of edit (too long/too short) Good length
Image (needed/appropriate) N/A
Review of textbook information (accuracy of info in edit) The information was precise
Article is empirical, primary & peer-reviewed Yes
Review of article information (accuracy, I/O Psych) The article information was accurate to I/O Psych and from the textbook.
Wikiformatting Nice work
Grammar & composition I liked the grammar
Other comments Good job

Mtrowers (talk) 14:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]