User talk:Laleeibssa
| This user is a student editor in University_of_California,_Berkeley/African_Politics_(Spring_2020) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Laleeibssa, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with Wiki Education; 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) 17:44, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Selina's Peer Review
[edit]General info Whose work are you reviewing: Laleeibssa Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Laleeibssa/Delmas Treason Trial
Lead Lead evaluation
The lead section provides a brief and concise introduction to the topic. "Just before the verdict, white supremacist spree killer Barend Strydom started to shoot people in the square outside the court. Eleven of those accused were found guilty; however, their sentences were overturned in 1989 after an appeal to the Supreme Court. " I think this sentence could be moved to a background section later in the article. It provides information about specifics of the case but is something that takes away from the short summary of the article.
Content
Guiding questions:
The content so far is relevant to the topic. I like how you have structured your article in a way that clearly explains the parties involved in the trial as well as their arguments and resulting verdict. I think what is missing is:
1. Introductory paragraph; a section that explains the background of what incidents occurred that resulted in the trial. What are the goals that the UDF was pushing and what their demands could have changed South Africa?
2. The afterwards; speaking about the effects of this verdict on the ADF and ANC.
3. Timeline; given that this trial was the longest trial in South African history it would be helpful to add a short timeline that summarizes the major events that happen throughout it.
Tone and Balance Tone and balance evaluation
The content so far is pretty impartial. You are doing a good job at sticking to reporting the facts of the trial. The tone of your writing is also impartial.
Sources and References Sources and references evaluation
I think as you develop your article further, you should rely on academic journals and other peer-reviewed articles. Since you are relying on a newspaper article (from the NYT) to report on the specifics of the case and have maintained an unbiased tone I don't think there would be an issue.But moving forward, especially talking about the political and social importance of this trial as it pertains to South African politics, you should solely rely on academic journals and peer-reviewed articles.
Organization Organization evaluation
The content of your article so far is clear and well-written. I didn't catch any grammar mistakes or spelling errors. The sections that you have added really make up for a clear and easy-to-follow article.
Images and Media Images and media evaluation
Not applicable given that you haven't added any media.
For New Articles Only New Article Evaluation
I believe you are drafting the article from scratch. I do think it meets the notability requirements. I searched some of the specifics of the trial on Google Scholar and I got multiple articles about it. Therefore, as long as you add multiple reliable sources to back it up, you should be fine.
Overall impressions
I think you have chosen a great topic to work on. I'm sure you already planned the rest of the article but I added some suggestions above on what might be missing from the current draft. Gonzalez.selinav (talk) 01:27, 7 April 2020 (UTC)