User talk:Ewhiteh6/John Auer

Hi! I peer reviewed your article here. Let me know if you have any questions! Conradsay (talk) 18:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MH final comments

Overall, this article is in good shape. I'd suggest the following modifications before you submit your final version, due May 8:

1. Make sure the tone is always conforming to Wikipedia's neutral standards - in some cases, this may even mean taking out adjectives like 'famous', which may be seen as telling the reader what to think about an individual (see the relevant section of the Style Guide on this topic). While this may seem overkill, being aware of this sort of language is a key step towards learning to use it strategically in other academic projects.

2. While you've done right to rely on secondary sources, providing links to the primary sources where possible - for example, to Auer's publications - makes the article more useful as a springboard for future research.

3. Take a final proofread for capitalization, spelling, etc.

Nice work! You've improved the article significantly, and I look forward to seeing the final version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.hin.ck (talk • contribs) 22:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MH comments

Nice job on this article! It's looking substantially better already. Keep the following in mind as you continue to revise:

1. This may just be a result of the Sandbox formatting, but make sure your illustrations have captions that appear without the reader needing to click.

2. Make sure you're always following the principle of 'show, don't tell': try to avoid summary evaluations, instead giving the reader enough information to draw their own conclusions. For example, you don't really need to tell the reader that 'Auer was admired' if you provide the evidence of others' admiration (the very positive Administrative Board quote). Letting the evidence speak for itself as much as possible will also help keep the tone of the article very neutral.

3. Place citations as close as possible to the relevant facts - ideally, the reader should be able to tie each specific statement to its source. For example, revisit the 'Auer Rods' section and see if the two citations are really both general, or whether they can be usefully identified with particular facts in that paragraph.

4. Adjust the ordering of the last three sections, looking at other Wikipedia biographies as a reference. I think it's most usual, for instance, to have lists of publications come last. If you feel strongly that it's best to end with his private life, that's perfectly fine - choose the ordering that seems best and most consistent with Wikipedia and your informative goals.

Also, please post a comment to the Talk page of the original article explaining that you're drafting a new version of this article for a WikiEducation class, providing a short summary of the changes you've made (dividing it into sections, adding information, etc.) so that when you begin moving this across in a couple of weeks, it won't come as a surprise.

Moving forward, read your peer reviews and continue to revise in the sandbox (all your old drafts are saved automatically). As the article is in fairly good shape already, focus on fine-tuning and possibly looking for some more multimedia for your second draft. Keep up the good work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.hin.ck (talk • contribs) 01:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]