User talk:Ly-So99
| This user is a student editor in University_at_Albany,_SUNY/Information_Literacy_in_the_Humanities_and_Arts_(8W2) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Ly-So99, 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) 14:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
[edit]
|
Hi Ly-So99! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Peer Feedback
[edit]the author of this wiki page has a clear and organized lead. The entire page is organized well and has a neutral tone. The author didn't include any "the best" talk. each section is organized extremely well and easy to understand. it's unbiased and the sources are cited correctly and are credible. after reading the lead, I feel like I know the importance of the topic. The lead reflected the most important information on the topic. No single aspect of the topic outweighs another. each aspect imbalanced well and very neutral. the sources are cited well and when necessary. overall, the article has a great lead and is organized really well and easy to understand.MW323776 (talk) 16:31, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Peer Review From: Madisonnnn019
[edit]The Lead: The first section of the article is very balanced and explains what each of the feminist perspectives in sex markets is and also explains what each type of job that women in the sex market have. The author explains how there are differing standpoints in regard to the terminology used to describe women in sex trade. So far there seems to be nothing missing and the first section is pretty clear. However, the contents are not fully finished.
A Clear Structure: So far there is only one section that has been organized by the author and it is called “Radical Feminism”, which views prostitution or any sex work that women engage in as the representation of the violence that women are subjected to by the patriarchal society that they live in. I think that this is a valid starting point because it is the first of the list of “feminist responses to sex market”. Once the rest of them are added, I think that the chronological order of the responses will be fine.
Balanced According to Available Literature: Within the part of the article that is written, I think that the author has balanced “The Lead” paragraph very nicely. Every term listed that will be read about throughout the article has an explanation that follows it and is very clear. The first section of the structure is also a valid amount of information about the first feminist response to the sex market.
Neutral Content: The author does a great job not expressing their own point of view about the topic. When a perspective of one type of feminist is presented, the author makes sure to include that other ideologies are present as well. For example, “With the distinctions between feminist perspectives, there are many documented instances from feminist authors of both explicit and implied feminist standpoints that provide coverage on the sex market in regard to both "autonomous" and "non-autonomous" sex trades. The quotations are added since some feminist ideology believe the commodification of women's bodies is never autonomous and therefore subversive or misleading by terminology.” This shows that the author is not trying to persuade the reader of anything but, educate the reader on all aspects of the topic.
Reliable Source: The author includes all sources used and they are accessible to the reader. All of the articles and credible sources also seem to make sense to the article.
- Note to author* I also think the empty topics that are waiting to be written are helpful for the reader to see, because it shows what is yet to come in the article.
--Madisonnnn019 (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Peer Feedback
[edit]In Feminist Perspectives on Sex Markets, the writer starts off their article by defining what the “sex market” is and the feminist perspectives on the topic at hand. The writer does a good job of setting up the lead of their article. They give the right amount of information and its brief, without inputting too many details. While skimming the article the writer is writing in a specific order. The first thing they do is address the topic and give little background information on it. Being that the paper is centered around “feminist perspectives” on the sex market, after giving information about the topic, they delve into the different standpoints on how females view/respond to that system. The writer introduces the idea of how sex marketing prevents gender equality by doing this the author is attempting to look at the broader implications of her topic. However, one thing I noticed is that the author starts off from a neutral point of view to make things balanced. The author inserts the scholar she is referring to in her writing while also acknowledging two sides to the argument. --Zyann Archibald (talk) 19:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Peer Review
[edit]Hi! I created your Peer Review! I think it will be very helpful for you while you are under taking the creation of an article! Really great job overall! Keep up the good work! Heres a link for you to view your review! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ly-So99/Feminist_Perspectives_on_Sex_Markets/ALeverich_Peer_Review