User talk:Johns7mn
| This user is a student editor in University_of_Cincinnati_/English_2089_Intermediate_Composition__(Fall_) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Johns7mn, 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) 16:26, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Draft
[edit]Hi! It looks like you tried creating your draft as a live article named Johns7mn/sandbox/draft. When you move your edits live, you will just need to add them to the existing article on your topic (Cincinnati Music Hall). You won't need to sign or highlight them, as your instructor will be able to find them via the Dashboard. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:34, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Peer Review
[edit]Cincinnati Music Hall
I didn't see much in the lead that needed fixing, it includes the most important and relevant information. If I were to add anything, it would be to hit on that specific venues that it holds, ie. the different auditorium/studios.
The main skeleton of the article is much better, the main sections being venue, architecture, and history seem much more organized. In the history section, I think I'm a little confused by why paranormal activities is a subsection in history and also, why so much of it was removed. I think it's historically relevant that it was built on those "creepy" places but I think the paranormal activity section should be on it's own since it is just testimony. Also, I think more of it should be kept, just not in the history section. It's important, I think, to the people looking for that information and to the current culture around the building-- even if it's not necessarily historically relevant that some people think it's haunted.
Overall, this seems very thorough. I would also, as a reader/patron of the place, be interested in it's current culture and use. For example, I would be interested in learning about it's relationship with local festivals and conventions and conferences.
This article does a really thorough job with recounting a very extensive history! Other than the things you've made notes of adding and the stuff I mentioned above, I think it looks really great!