User talk:Megansmith34
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Megansmith34, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam 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. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 23:36, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review #1
[edit]Hi there! My name is Jacqueline Jacobs and I am peer reviewing your article!
The Lead Section: - Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic? I am satisfied with the lead of this article because I originally had no idea what offender profiling was, and the lead gave me a really good sense as to what it is, what it is used for, and why it is used. - Does the lead section report the most important information? I wouldn’t say it provides all of the important information, but definitely enough to introduce the topic and give the reader a good understanding of it.
Structure: - Are the sections organized well? Would they make more sense presented some other way?
I actually really like the structure of the article because the lead is strong enough to make you want to read more, and then after the lead is the history, which helps you understand the topic a little better. The next section talks about current practices of offender profiling, which makes it easier for the reader to make it relevant to society today. The article then brings up examples and limitations. I genuinely really like the structure of this article and it makes me want to re-structure my own.
Balance - Are any major view points left out?
I don't see any major points left out.
- Is anything off-topic? No, nothing is off topic.
Neutral - Is the article neutral in tone?
Yes
- Can you guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? No because this article reminds me of a textbook chapter. It is very informative and avoids any personal opinions; it contains a lot of facts.
- Are there words or phrases that don't seem neutral? Look for "the best," "most people," "obviously, [x]"
No
- Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..."
No
Reliable sources - What types of sources does the article primarily use? This article used sources mostly from journals and articles. - Are there unsourced statements in the article? Nothing that I could find. - Are there only a few sources, or is most of the information from only one or two sources? There is 26 sources, which I consider to be a good amount!