User talk:Joyrucker5/sandbox
Feedback
[edit]I think it is organized in a well manner. There is a clear introduction to the topic, then a nice body paragraph, and a short but informative conclusion. I don’t think there was any extra stuff, all of the information helped form the ideas. I do think the term treatment in the sentence, “Additionally, results of treatment are considered better when it is offered at an earlier age.” Is a bit misleading and confusing. There needs to be some more information regarding why parents might reject their children’s decisions, maybe religion, or common beliefs. I could not guess the perspective of the author of this article. The author refers to some parents reactions as a negative way, I think that is sort of biased. The article tends to focus a lot of negative aspects, maybe add some positive things parents/children can do that make the transition easier. Sources/citations: The 3rd source at the bottom is a bad link Also there is only 3 sources when there is suppose to be 5. The sources/ external links are good choices, and they help further explain what the article is discussing. Cgraceo68 (talk) 14:53, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Feedback
[edit]I think it can be a very good topic to write about because the lack of information on the web about “coming out”. It is helpful to include many example, case studies on these children who experience being discriminated, out-casted, disowned, etc. Fix minor grammatical errors, CxC in Coates has a great editing team. Some things seem to be off topic due to the lack in an explanation/sources
Example: To "come out", according to Merriam Webster means to openly declare something about oneself previously kept hidden or to openly declare one's homosexuality.
To "come out" is define as to openly declare something about oneself previously kept hidden or to openly declare one's homosexuality. (#) And actually cite the dictionary.
I believe there are more than two sides to the story… example: trans kids who are disowned vs trans kids that are accepted or eventually accepted.
A lot more research needs to be done and more sources!
The article overall is not opinionated I don’t think… I cannot tell who wrote the article when first reading it. You used “some cases” and “some suggest” and that is making claims on behalf of unnamed groups… make sure just to explain more and cite who said what!
The article does not focus on too much negative or positive because I think there is a little bit of both.
Only 3 sources which aren’t cited, they are only links. The two academic sources should not be links because the general public will not be able to access so make a citation like he used in class. When re-using sources just go the re-use tab after clicked cite where you want the citation to go. Make sure to externally link as well as internally link (you did this!)
Overall, this article is very good and you remained pretty neutral throughout the entire thing! Great job! Rcoll23 (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2016 (UTC)