User talk:Guyhall1/sandbox

Guy,

I thought your update was very clear, organized, and well written. I thought it was good to have everything cited so well which is something I need to work on. I thought your information was good as well as the details you provided. I like how you broke everything out into sections but a new heading for the sections could be used. Overall I thought your draft was solid, there was new information and objective writing. I think you are on the right track with this and it read as a post that could be found in Wikipedia. Dfaustin23 (talk) 23:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peer

Guy, I thought your article additions are very interesting and present concise information backed by deep scholarship. I think I wondered most about how you're framing all this information on the page. Some of the sections could possibly be consolidated into one. I think your biggest challenge for the main space will be figuring out where each section is going to properly fit within the article. If you've accomplished this, I'd be willing to say that your article is about ready. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdfuller410 (talk • contribs) 05:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]