User talk:Pdonaldlees
Here are the comments I made from reviewing your article. So far, it looks good! Just a few minor formatting suggestions.
1. Does the lead section provide a stand-alone concise summary of the article? See: Lead section and for an even more thorough treatment see: Guide to writing better articles.
The lead section is mostly about what titles he holds or awards he was given. It does not say anything else about what he is known for. I suggest adding a brief paragraph that gives the major contributions of Sternberg to psychology besides his accomplisments.
2. Does the contribution appear to be cut and pasted from an existing source without appropriate citation?
The paper is cited, but I do not know if the citations are correct. There were places where the entire citation is listed in the text, and I feel like it should be just the last name of the author or something shorter. Adds a lot of words to the article that interrupt the flow. The citations are consistent throughout the article, so that is a good thing, but maybe consider changing it to a shorter version of the citation.
3. Is field-specific jargon avoided where possible and explained where necessary? I.e., is the general lay audience of an encyclopedia adequately kept in mind by the author and student-editor?
Things are written very clear. The explanation of the things he accomplished in his life is explained well. I would suggest rethinking the sections and section headings to better separate information. I feel like the author started to do this since there are distinctions between paragraphs, but the sections need to be defined clearer.
4. Are wikilinks, i.e., links to other Wikipedia articles, provided where appropriate?
Yes.
5. Does the contribution maintain a neutral point of view, consist of verifiable statements, and avoid becoming original research/opinion?
Yes.
6. Are facts cited from reputable sources, preferably sources that are accessible and up-to-date, except those that are added to provide historical relevance to the article? Are additional references for further reading provided?
I think the references used are very reputable and not from nonsense sites. I checked out a few of them and they seemed legitimate.
7. Is the contribution clear; written to avoid ambiguity and misunderstanding, using logical structure, and plain clear prose; free of redundant language?
Yes.
8. Are the grammar, verb tenses, and spelling correct? Common mistake: multiple verb tenses throughout article. (Most of the topics of these articles describe past events, so use past tense consistently throughout. "The plaintiff argued...The defendant responded...The court decided..." NOT The Plaintif argues...The defendant responds...The court decides...")
Some of the wording in the paragraphs should be changed to be more scholarly. For example, “He did so bad on his …” should be changed to something about the lines of “He did poorly on his…”. The wording used in the sentence needs to be changed to have a more scholarly feel to the article.
9. Is the page categorized appropriately?
The section and section headings could be organized better. There are some categories already, but more work needs to be done so information about certain aspects of Sternberg’s life can be found quicker and easier. Right now it is hard to tell the distinction between sections so make section headings larger font.
10. In general, are the reasons why the article topic is notable made clear, providing enough detail on important aspects, without providing too much detail on minor points?
Yes.
11. Are links provided to publicly-available versions of all primary sources, such as original articles? Are citations done properly?
Some of the references use only first initials while others use first names. Be sure this is consistent throughout all the references. There also are four ‘Key References’ sections in the bibliography section, which is confusing. These should all be combined in one bibliography instead of four bibliographies within one main bibliography.
12. Are references formatted properly? Here is one example of how a reference for a law source is formatted: [1] Subsequent references to the same source then just need [1] and see generally Referencing for beginners.
See above: not consistent use of names.
13. Is the "educational assignment" template included on the article's discussion page?
Yes.
Specific
1. Cite-check every reference in the article. That means, look at each reference and confirm that it supports the point that the article cites it for.
2. Make sure that the citations are formatted in a consistent manner and that none of them are simply a bare URL.
3. Once you are familiar with the subject matter of the article, try to think of a relevant aspect of the topic that is not covered at all or not covered enough and add that need and the need for relevant sources as a comment to the Talk page of the article.
One aspect that could be added is the people who influenced Sternberg. Just a sentence claiming who his main influences were and what ideas he used from them.
Start a discussion with Pdonaldlees
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. Start a new discussion to connect and collaborate with Pdonaldlees. What you say here will be public for others to see.
