Carolleesw

Christian's Peer Review

Introduction: The introduction is such an improvement from the original. You did a great job elaborating what wasn't there before. Be careful of grammar, there are a couple of mistakes in your second sentence. Also, I don't know how much the last sentence of the introduction is needed; it works in introducing us to more about Cho, but it needs something more concrete to tie it into an intro - more evidence of what she's done. I hope this makes sense.

Educational Background: Again, it's beautiful and I think you concretely gave a description of her education. Note grammar again. The quote is great where it is.

Depiction of Korean American Females: Though this section is chalk full of information, the list of examples you give appear as a list and not as examples that further the point. A different way of introducing what works in her plays may be needed.

Aubergine: The focus is on her writing, but you may want to put more historically focuses about the play. It's production history, actors, etc., seem to be what Wikipedia enjoys doing in their pages.

Bibliography: Looks amazing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GLChriss111 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 17 May 2018 (UTC)