User talk:Escheit2/sandbox

Evaluations for first edit

4/20/2019 Evaluation for the First Edit by WavesOfAmur

Points: 41.5/40 Grade: 104%

Spelling/Grammar Meets Expectations (4)

Language Meets Expectations (4)

Organization Meets Expectations (4)

Coding Perfect (4.5)

Validity Meets Expectations (4)

Completion Exceeds Expectations (4.5) - I personally think that you went above and beyond with the amount of info you've provided, so I think it exceeds expectations, for sure.

Relevance Exceeds Expectations (4.5) - The info you've provided seems to be something that should pertain to every little part of history in regard to what happened to this city, so I think it also exceeds expectations.

Sources Meets Expectations (4) - Unfortunately, you don't seem to have many citations in the format that Wikipedia usually has it (little numbers after the paragraph/sentence), all you really need to do is just integrate them into the text and you're golden!

Citations Meets Expectations (4) - Similar as the 'Sources' critique above, once you include the citation format into the text, I think it'll be perfect.

References Meets Expectations (4) Same as the two above. Not sure if this section is relevant for grading, though, since it seems to be similar to the two above?

4/20/2019 Evaluation by User:BethanyJJohnson

-Points: 35 -Grade: 88%

Spelling/Grammar- 4, ("Jews were send" should this be "were sent"?)

Language- 3.5 First sentence is a little hard to read. I'd maybe start with "During WWII...". I'd also maybe rephrase "The first one shut down in 2007 going on until 2013 when the last one closed"

Organization- 4

Coding- 4

Validity- 4.5

Completion- 4.5, good job!

Relevance- 4.5, no irrelevant information added.

Sources- 2, I'm sure you have sources, they just need to be added!

Citations- 2, Again, just add them so we can see what sources you used.

References- 2, same as sources and citations. BethanyJJohnson (talk) 00:04, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

4.21.19 Evaluation by Joshua Gramley

Hey, Eric! Since I've already given you some feedback over in our group thread (before I understood that we should do feedback here), I'll try to limit this evaluation to anything I haven't already covered (hoping to avoid repeating myself here).

Spelling/Grammar meets standards. Pretty sure I covered most of my feedback here on the group thread, but here's a quick addition: regarding those "5 new church bells," it's generally standard to write out any number under 10...so you might play around with rewriting as "five new church bells." By the way, when I clicked on this link, it went to a film on another site. I may be wrong, but I believe hyperlink text within Wikipedia pages generally goes only to other Wikipedia pages.

Language meets standards. I've already given you feedback here, too, but as I revisit what you wrote, I have something minor to add...you use the phrase "Many thought" towards the middle of your third paragraph here. Typically, I think this sort of sentence gets flagged on Wikipedia for more specific info (i.e., who thinks this? How do we know?) You may want to be a little more specific about that "many," and add a citation for this line.

Organization meets standards. You seem to be adding info in just the right spot here. Still have questions about the placement of that last sentence, but you're already aware of that :)

Coding exceeds standards.

Validity meets standards. Seems like everything here is legitimate.

Completion Not sure what your sources are yet, so I'm not sure on this one! I do see that you've added a full and detailed paragraph, though, so it seems like you're doing just fine on that part of the assignment.

Relevance meets/exceeds standards. You've found a really cool detail with which to elaborate upon existing material. Were I to visit Mannheim after this, I'd recall your addition to this article while seeing/hearing those bells, and probably tell my travel partner(s) about it. I'm inspired by the way you've managed to ground history in the cultural fabric of the city, in a way which probably resonates with its inhabitants.

Sources standard? As others have mentioned, still waiting on these :)

Citations standard? same as above.

References standard? same as above.

Really nice work in progress here, Eric! Joshua Gramley (talk) 02:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

4/23/19 Evaluation by GbrooksPDXStudent

• Points: 42

Spelling/Grammar Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Not a single spelling error found and grammar was fine.

Language Meets Standard: 4

Fine use of encyclopedic tone and diction

Organization Meets Standard: 4

Could certainly add more flare and flow to the piece, but as a rough draft it's easily readable.

Coding Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Perfect coding, no flaws found

Validity Meets Standard: 4

Nothing seems too incredible and all information either is sourced or backed up with notable detail.

Completion Meets Standard: 4

Definitely provided plenty of detail surrounding Mannheim during and after the war, the extra detail to the bells is wonderful.

Relevance Exceeds Standard: 4.5

All seems necessary and any extra detail is completely merited given the topic's relative recentness from a historical perspective

Sources Meets Standard: 4

Given the shortness of the section the limited sources are adequate but certainly could be improved upon.

Citations Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Citations not only are present but appear to be in perfect format.

References Meets Standard: 4

References are all accounted for and in a correctly pre-defined format.

GbrooksPDXStudent (talk) 06:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

5/4/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright

DrMichaelWright (talk) 15:54, 4 May 2019 (UTC) This is a decent start, and good enough to post to Wikipedia proper, but could still stand some polishing (see below).

• Points: 33/40
• Grade: 82.5%

Spelling/Grammar

Nearly meets standard.

• Capitalization ("...by the R.A.F. and the U.S. Air Force. the R.A.F. razed...")
• "...der as "The most important church in Baden-Württemberg"."
  • 'T' should not be capitalized.
  • Period goes before the closing quotation mark.
  • Strike 'as'.

Language

Nearly meets standard.

• "...was left abandoned till the United States..." informal (and also missing an apostrophe). 'Until' would be better.
• "Many thought that..." speculative. If they expressed it, then you should say that.

Organization

Nearly meets standard.

• Your paragraph, starting with "During one of the bombings..." chronologically belongs between the two previous paragraphs.
• "The architecture and design of the church make it what some consider as "The most important church in Baden-Württemberg." This sentence belongs in a different section.
• "These bells were originally taken down in 1942 to help the war for Germany." is a standalone sentence, which should be part of the preceding paragraph.

Coding

Meets standard.

Validity

Meets standard.

Completion

Meets standard.

Relevance

Nearly meets standard. There are three whole or partial paragraphs devoted to just the church. That is maybe a bit excessive. Would some of your material not be better placed on the Wikipedia article about the church?

Sources

Nearly meets standard. I see that with the video link you do have three sources in total, but none of them are peer reviewed/academic sources. Surely there has to be some more higher-quality material to draw on. Don't limit yourself to easily-accessible online materials.

Citations

Nearly meets standard.

• The second citation sits in the middle of a sentence, rather than at the end.
• The paragraph "After the Allies...made since then," does not have any citations, seemingly relying on just the video, which is not referenced.

References

Nearly meets standard.

• The Bells for Mannheim source is a decent one. It should be cited and referenced, rather than hyperlinked.
• The RAF History page is from a web archive. Its reference should also include information about the original source.

Evaluations for Second Edit

5/15/2019 Evaluation for the Second Edit by WavesOfAmur

• This was originally for your first edit peer review, but I'm gonna change it to the 2nd since I don't want to clutter your sandbox too much. I'll have the original, 1st peer review, on-hand if it is needed
• Points: 30.5/40
• Grade: 77%

Spelling/Grammar Meets Expectations (4) -- seems fine to me. Especially appreciate your supplement of German words for authenticity. Pretty cool, just like in real Wikipedia articles! There is one notable hiccup with "The long night of museums (German: Lange Nacht der Museen)" - shouldn't it be capitalized, just as the German equivalent is?

Language Meets Expectations (4) -- don't see many issues here.

Organization Nearly Meets Expectations (3) -- it looks rather odd in some places. There is, for example, a big, unnecessary space between the paragraph ending in "...manager Brian Epstein" and the paragraph starting with "Hamburg has nurtured...". Perhaps it's nitpicking, but it does look rather strange and out of place.

Coding Meets Expectations (4) -- Aside from the "[Edit]" next to the categories, I don't think there's anything wrong with how it's set up.

Validity Meets Expectations (4) -- Seems to be ok on this end.

Completion Nearly meets Expectations (3) - You've got the paragraphs requirement covered fairly well, but with only 3 sources. The minimum is 10, so that needs to be fulfilled as soon as possible!

Relevance Exceeds Expectations (4.5) - I feel as if the stuff that you DO have is more than pertinent to what you're trying to do, and if you add 7 more sources, it'll be even greater. So I'll leave it as this.

Sources Meets Expectations (4) - Only three sources, but those three look pretty great. Lots of examples of different plays, musicals, and groups. Looks good!

Citations Does Not Meet Expectations (2) - Sorry, but you've only got three :( You need 7 more to fulfill the requirement for this edit. It's hard, but it's a requirement.

References Does Not Meet Expectations (2) - Same as above, not enough sources.

5/15/19 Evaluation by User:BethanyJJohnson

Apologies if I seem a bit harsh here! I just want you to do well on this project. Feel free to send me an email with any questions!

Points: 23/ 40

Spelling/Grammar - 3 "formative early years" is a bit repetitive. It would be best to just say "formative years", but I think you could also get away with "early formative". "Johannes Brahms boyhood" This is possessive, should have an apostrophe. "Johannes Brahms boyhood came under numerous challenges, though later in life (he) played piano" "Hamburgs harbor" is possessive " Red Light District" I don't believe this needs to be capitalized.

Language - 3 Several paragraphs could use some re-structuring to make the read have a better flow.

The first paragraph seems pretty staccato. Is there a way to make it flow better? Maybe starting with "Hamburg is home to three main orchestras," listing the orchestras, then going into detail on each one individually. Just a stylistic thought!

"Since the German premiere of Cats in 1986, there have always been musicals running" Maybe "Hamburg has seen a constant run of musicals since the German premiere of Cats in 1986. Major shows to visit the city include..."

"His whole life is under a constant controversy, whether or not he lured sailors into dockside bars for prostitutes or not. Many claim he did these actions, while others claim he was an honest and pure man." I would rearrange these two sentences. Perhaps start with "many people believe he was an honest and pure man, but there has been some controversy surrounding his life, including (sailors/prostitutes, etc.)"

Organization - 3 The article doesn't seem to flow very well. Maybe add some transition sentences at the start of each new paragraph.

"The iconic Elbphilharmonie in Hafen-City, seen from the Speicherstadt." Not sure what this is referring to.

Coding - 2 Several more phrases/words could be linked to other articles. The numbers in the citations run into the 80s but there are only three sources at the bottom... Maybe go back through and recite so it's a little more clear?

Validity - 4 Without personally knowing anything about Hamburg culture, nothing jumps out as inaccurate.

Completion - 3 Some statements could use more detail (specifically, more on the opera houses and orchestras, as well as the composers mentioned)

Relevance - 3 Some details could be left out, like the mention of the Beatles' manager. I would consider sticking to either just music, or just festivals, and really focus your attention on one to really be able to fine-tune it.

Sources - 2 I only see three sources

Citations Several statements need citations. There are no citations at all in the section on pop music.

References - 2 Looks like you have two sources from academic journals, and only one other source. I believe we should have a total of 10 for this edit.

BethanyJJohnson (talk) 04:43, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

5.16.19 Evaluation by Joshua Gramley

Hi, Eric! Really cool work here. I appreciate your very deep and diverse work on Hamburg's music scene! Checking out those Hamburg School bands now as I write you this feedback :)

Spelling/Grammar nearly meets standards. A few things I have questions about: 1. There are a couple of places where there are sentence fragments--e.g., the first line, and later, the first line under "Festivals and Regular Events." Not sure if these are meant to accompany photos, or act as headings, or what; some attention to these would be good. 2. Need a space after "GraveDigger" in music 3. "A city harbors birthday" --need an apostrophe there to make it possessive, like "harbor's birthday" 4. "such hanseboot" --add "as"

Language nearly meets standards. Overall, I think you have good tone. A few things I have questions about: 1. The section on Brahms seems like it needs a little attention. a) If the paragraph is really just about Brahms, what do you think about waiting to mention Oscar Fetrás until the end (e.g., "Hamburg is also the home of Oscar...etc")? As it stands, with him in the first line, I feel like he gets a little left behind in this paragraph, since the rest is about Brahms (not saying you need more info about Fetrás here, just to be clear...only mean to suggest that you might want move him). b) This sentence: "Johannes Brahms boyhood came under numerous challenges, though later in life played piano on the dockside of Hamburgs harbor." ...You may want to play with rephrasing a bit. "Came under numerous challenges" feels a little unclear...maybe change to something like "experienced many challenges in youth"? c) The sentence that begins "Through this controversy" is a little ambiguous, since "through" can mean different things in different contexts...and in this one, it's possible to read that the controversy was how he came to establish a strong public image. Guessing that's not the case, so what about trying something like "In spite of this controversy"?

Organization nearly meets standards. As someone has already pointed out, the spacing is a little odd in places. Also, I see that your headings have [edit] in them, which you'll probably want to remove!

Coding meets standards. Good and thorough use of hyperlinks.

Validity meets standards. Seems like everything here is legitimate.

Completion Exceeds standards. You obviously went above and beyond with this one!

Relevance nearly meets standards. I feel like the details on Brahms wander (at the end of the paragraph) into the territory of stuff that would make more sense on the Brahms page, rather than the Hamburg page.

Sources meets standards; you have 10, and they seem legitimate.

Citations nearly meets standards. In the Beatles section, you have a citation inside the sentence, before the period.

References meets standards. You have some dates to fix (those "Check date values" errors); I have some to fix on my page, and can't remember for the life of me how to do so, but I'm sure we can both figure it out by tomorrow evening!

Alright--thanks for the opportunity to check out your article! It's going to make a great contribution to the Hamburg page. Joshua Gramley (talk) 03:42, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

6/3/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright

DrMichaelWright (talk) 16:14, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

It really is preferable for you to create a new sandbox rather than recycling the old. I nearly gave you a very bad grade because all I saw (before going into the history) was a page about Helsinki without anything new added. Also, it is difficult to easily discern what is your text and what is the original except by close comparison. That close comparison suggests that there are just a few snippets of new material.

• Points: 27/40
• Grade: 67.5%

Spelling/Grammar

Nearly meets standard.

• "...the company that premiered "Cats", has..." Put Cats into italics, rather than quotation marks.
• "Johannes Brahms boyhood came under numerous challenges..."
  • There should be an apostrophe after Brahms, since it is his boyhood (possessive).
  • 'Under' does not seem like an appropriate preposition for 'challenges' or controversy.
• "...Johannes Brahms has created..." Omit 'has' since Brahms is dead, and it should be in the simple past, rather than the perfect present.
• "St. Paul" should be 'St. Pauli'

Language

Nearly meets standard. The sentence "This type of anniversary is to celebrate a city harbors birthday" suggests that other port cities also have Hafengeburtstager. Is that so, or is this the one. Certainly the article on Hafengeburtstag suggests that it's just Hamburg.

Organization

Meets standard.

Coding

Nearly meets standard. There are some code errors in the references.

Validity

Standard?? It is hard to tell if the material you write is valid, given that the text has so little-to-nothing to do with the cited sources. Since you didn't bother to provide legitimate sources, I won't bother to see if any of this checks out. I'll just assume it doesn't.

Completion

Nearly meets standard.

• The picture is a nice touch, but could have used a little bit more explanation, and should have appeared next to the paragraph relating to the Beatles.
• There is not a great deal of added text here.

Relevance

Does not meet standard.

• I agree with Joshua. Much of the material about Brahms seems too specific for the purposes here, since it talks more about Brahms than about Hamburg. What about Brahms' life is intricately connected to the city and its uniqueness?
• What does Brian Epstein have to do with Hamburg? He met the Beatles back home in Liverpool.

Sources

Standard??

• A number of the sources either cannot be verified or have nothing to do with the written material.
  • The link to the Pennebaker source goes to a 404 page on the publisher's website.
  • The Konzertprogramme does not have any information about Brahms.
  • The BackLetter is a journal on the diagnosis and treatment of spinal problems and back pain. What does it have to do with the Beatles? Which article is being cited?
  • The DATO...whatever has nothing to do with anything related to Hamburg.
  • "Doris Jones, longstanding Society assistant librarian, celebrates 100th birthday" Are you kidding me???

Citations

Nearly Meets standard.

• "It is said..." by whom? If you're going to state this, then it is worthwhile to mention the source in the text, even if it is some sort of folklore.
• Note 8 comes before the period.

References

Meets standard. They're absurd, and clearly include nonsense information, but they're not improperly formatted.

Evaluations for the Third Edit

06/08/2019 Evaluation for the Third Edit by WavesOfAmur

• Points: 33/40
• Grade: 83%

• Spelling/Grammar

Nearly Meets Expectations (3) - some sentences may need work. "The museum building itself, a national romantic style neomedieval castle, is a tourist attraction." - might need to be worded a bit better (I can't think of a better suggestion at the top of my head, my apologies). Another is: "Another major museum, is the Helsinki City Museum, which is located near in the cultural district of Helsinki. The site of the museum was in spotlight, due to being one of the first government owned properties to be refurbished under a policy created to invest in Finnish art centers all around Finland.[4]" - seems like a mouthful, even if it's separated. Perhaps it needs shortened a little? Lastly, "The Helsinki Museum of Contemporary Art[2], also known as Kiasma, is a museum that focuses on Finnish contemporary arts.. The architecture in the museum is deemed a major architectural landmark for the Nordic region.[3]" - there are two periods separating these two sentences, otherwise I think they're fine.

• Language

Meets Expectations (4) - I think the language suffices, but at times it's kind of weird - for example: "The school is well known for their arts and sciences, and aims at all levels from undergraduates to doctorates"< ---- I personally did not understand initially what this meant, perhaps you just need to word it a bit better, such as "...is well known for their arts and sciences, and offers undergraduate and post-undergraduate degrees". This is most definitely not a good example (sorry, I'm not doing well on examples at the moment), but hopefully you get the idea - make it clear that the school offers particular types of degrees, or perhaps you could remove it altogether, considering it's probably apparent to most readers that at least the undergrad. degree would be offered.

• Organization

Meets Expectations (4) - I kind of like your organization. It's mostly short, concise, and gets to the point. Not too many big paragraphs and everything looks rather neat "going down the list", so nice job!

• Coding

Meets Expectations (4) - seems okay, however there is a red text reference at the bottom of the page (reference #14) - may need to edit the citation there. Also, you may as well add a 'references' section, so as to keep track of where the references are, and for accessibility purposes.

• Validity

Nearly Meets Expectations (3) - I don't know about validity - while all the information you have in the edit seems to be quite pertinent and sensible, the sources you have are kind of all over the place, and it's not very clear what comes from where. This may be just a nitpick, though, and I'm sure you know better whether the info you've gotten is valid or not.

• Completion

Meets Expectations (4) - edit looks complete. It has 20 sources, and an adequate quantity of paragraphs and information.

• Relevance

Meets Expectations (4) - seems to be primarily centered around the city's confines, so I think it's fine. In fact, I think there is more depth here than I expected there to be, especially with the transit and railroad systems.

• Sources

Nearly Meets Expectations (3) - some of these sources, like I said, seem to be all over the place - it is not exactly clear what is being cited and where. That, and also one of your sources is cited rather improperly, specifically the reference #20 - I think it has more info than what it may immediately give away. Moreover, the sources themselves are also composed of some articles and newspapers, which may bring down validity.

• Citations

Nearly Meets Expectations (3) - most of the citations in the edit are too broadly spread out. As mentioned before, it is not exactly clear as to what you're citing from. A good example of this is in the paragraph under section "Sports" - specifically: Helsinki was elected host-city of the 1940 Summer Olympics, but due to World War II they were canceled. Instead Helsinki was the host of the 1952 Summer Olympics. The Olympics were a landmark event symbolically and economically for Helsinki and Finland as a whole that was recovering from the winter war and the continuation war fought with the Soviet Union. Helsinki was also in 1983 the first ever city to host the World Championships in Athletics. Helsinki also hosted the event in 2005, thus also becoming the first city to ever host the Championships for a second time. The Helsinki City Marathon has been held in the city every year since 1980, usually in August." - While I understand this may be found in just one source, it seems as if the information is simply "pulled out of thin air" - I think it needs to be communicated that it exists within that particular source, and not cited just at the very end of the paragraph. Hopefully you know what I mean, and my apologies if I sound too harsh while critiquing this portion of your edit so much.

• References

Meets Expectations (4) - you have 20, and they seem to be pertinent, but they need to be formatted a bit better. References #15-20 seem like they have more information to be added than what is immediately given, and I think a bit more thoroughness is required in implementing that info. If you've already diligently searched for this info and found nothing, then my apologies - please disregard this comment, in that case. Lastly, you should add a references section, because I think it'll help you with organization and with accessibility for the viewers.

06/09/2018 Evaluation by Joshua Gramley

Hey, Eric! Here goes evaluation #3. Apologies for the wall of text here, and that some of my advice doesn't fit neat categorization.

Spelling/Grammar you still have work to do here. Some thoughts:

1. "displays a vast historical collection from prehistoric times..." = would put a comma after "collections." 2. "...that focuses on Finnish contemporary arts.." = just one period necessary :) 3. "Another major museum, is the Helsinki City Museum, which is located" = first comma is extraneous, you can delete it. Although personally, I think you might want to play with rephrasing this, since the name of the museum establishes that it's a museum, rendering the introductory "museum" kinda redundant. 4. "The site of the museum was in spotlight, due to being one of the first government owned properties" ...the easy part of this: I would hyphenate "government-owned." As for the first part...the phrase about "in [the] spotlight" is a little vague. Was this site itself important or controversial here? Whose spotlight are we talking about? I suppose this question might fit better under the "language" category that comes next; anyway, some clarification here would help. 5. "The biggest being University of Helsinki, originally founded in 1640, and having a current student population of 34,833. [6]" = this is a run-on sentence. Can I suggest a rephrasing? I'd go with some version of "The largest of these is the University of Helsinki, originally founded in 1640, whose current student population is 34,833." So you're referencing what came before, but in a way that stands on its own. I went with "largest" over "biggest" because the latter feels a little informal. And the "and having" construction is awkward, so I swapped in something I feel flows a little better. Using "whose" for inanimate objects might seem super weird, but it's allowed, and here's my old pal Merriam Webster to back me up on that: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/whose-used-for-inanimate-objects 6. "The school is well known" = again, I'd hyphenate: "well-known." Honestly, hyphenation is tricky, and I double-check myself routinely on this one (while still, I'm sure, occasionally getting it wrong). Here's a reference resource: https://www.grammarly.com/blog/hyphen/ 7. "Familial Cancers" = not a proper noun, as far as I know, so you don't have to capitalize. Resource on capitalizing rules with diseases: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/233975/are-names-of-diseases-ever-capitalized (relevant to your "Infections" in the following paragraph) By the by, is it cases they're publishing, or case studies? Might want to check for appropriate language here. 8. " a long tradition of sports: the city gained" = I think the punctuation you want here is a semicolon. This thing → ; Although beware that this sentence seems to run on a bit. You might play with breaking it up a little (for instance, new sentence after "1952 Summer Olympics"). Personally, I could not function as a writer without semicolons and em dashes (to the point of flagrant overuse, yeah; I'm working on it), but I sort of hesitate to use them in my Wiki articles, because I feel like the language conventions are a little more matter-of-fact. 9. "their local rivals with 7 championship titles" = this is a nitpick, but generally, numbers under 10 (sometimes higher) are spelled out, rather than using the numeral. So, "seven" here. 10. "stadium hosted the first ever Bandy World Championship" = hyphenate "first-ever" 11. " host-city" ...doesn't need to be hyphenated, I don't believe. 12. "Helsinki and Finland as a whole that was recovering from the winter war and the continuation war fought with the Soviet Union" = this sentence is pretty close to a run-on. You might be able to tweak it in the spirit of the following: "and Finland as a whole, which was still recovering from the Winter War, along with the Continuation War..." I've capitalized "winter war" and "continuation war" here because I am presuming they are actual named events, but because I am historically undereducated, I don't actually know what they are. Seems like a great place for you to hyperlink to other articles. Ah, I see that Winter War (proper noun) is already linked above in the page; continuation war is not, though, so I would search out something for that. 13. " Länsiväylä and Itäväylärespectively" = space needed here. 14. "the construction of the long debated extension" = yup, you guessed it; I'd hyphenate something here.

Language you still have work to do here. Some things I'd like to point out:

1. "The old Ateneum": how does this differentiate from the Ateneum Art Museum? Is there a Wiki page for this (presumably different) building to which you could link? Some clarification here would help. 2. "aims at all levels from undergraduates to doctorates": can you rephrase this a little? Maybe "awards degrees at multiple levels, from undergraduate to doctorate." Honestly, I'm not totally sure how people talk about this sort of thing, so if I were you, I might go poking around some university Wiki pages for some more official language to model. 3. "A major finding at this local Finnish university was a study done": A few things: a. I would lose the "local Finnish uni"; we know which country we're in. Instead, how do you feel about keeping this with the previous paragraph, so that it's clearer that you're still elaborating on University of Helsinki? The new paragraph implies a new topic, or a change in topic. Also, the finding was a result of the study done. So, I'd go with "An important study at the university produced a major finding related to" CNS, pneumonia, etc. 4. "Most of them are small venues, while some have generated interest internationally": I would rephrase, like "most of them take place in small venues. Some have generated interest internationally." By the way, this whole section appears to need citation; although it may not be your original research (seems to be on the original page), I think one good place to plug in with improving the work of others is to find citations for stuff that they've missed. 5. "and one nationwide and five national public service radio channels": how do "nationwide" and "national" differ here? Seems redundant, or at the very least, confusing. 6. "The fixtures between the two are commonly known as Stadin derby": is fixture a type of sporting event? I don't know that it's common knowledge, so if so, you might want to link this to another Wiki article, or find another word (e.g., matches) that is a little more context-general. 7. "Helsinki was also in 1983 the first ever city to host the World Championships in Athletics. Helsinki also hosted the event in 2005, thus also": you have a surplus of "also" here, friend :) Consider synonyms. 8. "Though Helsinki doesn't share as many drivers as other Baltic cities, the city does have congestion problems which relate to places such as Lyon and Stockholm.[14]": a few confusing things here: a) When you say "share," what do you mean? Like: doesn't have? The simpler phrase might be better here. Also, how do the congestion problems relate to Lyon and Stockholm? Do you mean to say that, rather, they are similar? if so, "similar to" might be the better phrase. 9. "After this railways construction, many believed it helped integrate the Baltic States to the rest of Europe": the sentences before this suggest that the construction hasn't happened yet--it's just planned. If that's so, then the shift to past-tense here is pretty confusing. Checking the rail Baltica page, it looks like it's not yet built. So, I would change this to "After this railway's construction, many believe it will help integrate..." (Note the possessive 's added to railway there, by the way.) Same advice goes for the next two sentences; the railway *will* connect, etc. Also, connecting to Russia and Poland, it's probably *lines* of the railway, rather than new (unnamed) railways, right? 10. "Helsinki's airport also has strong ties with Tallinn and Saint Petersburg, that share services between cities. These services are primarily trains and city hopper flights between these two Baltic cities": Hmm, this one's a little wonky. Here's my suggested revision, based on what I think I'm understanding: "Helsinki's airport also has strong ties with airports in Tallinn and Saint Petersburg. These airports share services, including trains and city hopper flights." Is that right? I would also link "city hopper," if you can. The trains part is a little confusing; do you mean some sort of light rail? If so, you might want to specify, since the notion of just straight up trains going from airport to airport could evoke all sorts of ideas, some of which are weird :) 11. "The most common mode of transport to other Baltic countries are by ferry. Helsinki has many ships that travel all across the area": sentence 1: common mode of transport "is," rather than "are." As for the second sentence, seems super vague; can you fill in some detail here? Maybe, like, some numbers re: ship traffic, or number of licensed ships, or whatever? Also, just FYI, I note that you're missing citations for both claims; that seems like a problem, since these are assertions not necessarily easy to check in reality. Would cite with some statistics. 12. "Helsinki's tram system has been in operation with electric drive continuously since 1900. 13 routes that cover the inner part of the city are operated": maybe there's a better way to integrate that "electric drive"--e.g., "Helsinki's tram system, which uses electric drive technology, has been in operation..." I would link the electric drive thing to another Wiki page, too. As for the "13 routes," passive voice is a little awkward here, although I get that sometimes, we see it in encyclopedic contexts. I might try something like "The system operates 13 routes, which cover the inner part of the city." 13. "the only metro system in Finland, albeit the Helsinki commuter rail": "albeit" feels weird here; how about trying the slightly more working-class "although"?

Organization still needs work. Some thoughts: 1. In "sports," what do you think about making ice hockey a new paragraph? 2. Again in "sports," it feels a little awkward that you bring up the Olympics, move on, and then return to them in the second paragraph. Any way you can see to reorganize here, in order to cover the Olympics in the first paragraph, and then continue on with other stuff? These sorts of organization challenges are really the hardest thing for me with editing Wikipedia, so you're not alone. 3. Would make new paragraphs out of some of the other sports near the end, too; as it stands, reading it is like running a triathlon :)

Coding needs work, but you're nearly there, I think. Structurally, everything looks good. There are multiple places where I think you need to link to other Wiki pages, which I've detailed above.

Validity because you're lacking citations in so many areas, I'm not even really sure where to begin with checking the validity of your claims. So, needs significant work...but I think you'll get there, since most of your claims seem based in reality and such :) I worry especially about sentences that mention argument in passing--the long-debated metro, the seriously-debated metro, etc. Claims like these imply a little more than simply the existence of a thing; if processes were contentious, I think you should have good documentation of this, and perhaps even some clarifying detail (i.e., why was it contentious?) Missing out info still makes a statement, you know?

Completion still needs work, I think. Just comparing to the original article, it seems like thus far, the majority of your edit matches what exists on the page, with a few sentences and short paragraphs added here and there. If that's the case, you may have work to do. I believe the rough suggestion was five paragraphs of work. If you're there, and I'm just not doing a very good job of seeing it, then you're good, and my apologies! But if you're not quite there, maybe you want to dig around for a little more info? Some other thoughts:

1. "All TV channels are broadcast digitally, both terrestrially and on cable": I don't have a TV, but I don't know that I'd be alone in being kind of confused by this statement. Oh, ok, update: I've looked it up, and now, I think I get it. So for "terrestrially," you might want to link to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrestrial_television

Relevance nearly meets standards. I can see that your edits provide good additional info on themes already in the article. I don't know that I have a lot to say here, other than, you know, to clarify some of the relevance-related ambiguities of language described above.

Citations still needs lots of work. Noticing that you have an unusual format of citation going here; e.g., "The biggest historical museum in Helsinki is the National Museum of Finland[1],..." I believe citations are supposed to corroborate a claim. Your full claim here also includes that the museum displays history from x to y. Since this is so, I think you want the citation at the end of the sentence.

Also, remember that citations should come after punctuation, not before.

The paragraph beginning "Helsinki was elected host-city of the 1940 Summer Olympics," is presently nearly devoid of citations, which seems like a pretty big problem. Can you cite some of this stuff?

The paragraph on the Helsinki metro needs citations, too!

Sources Still needs work. Some notes: 1. Source 1: not sure that the front page really tells us anything other than that the museum exists; see my note above about where/when/why to cite with this sentence. Probably ditto with source 2. 2. Since you're using medical journals for sources 8 and 9, you might want to go check out the Wiki requirements for medical sources, which are, I think, a little more strict and special than everyday academic sources. Maybe your info here is of a sufficiently general nature to not require anything special of you on these, but if it were me, I'd want to be sure. I think this is the relevant page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine) Source 12 is...a previous version of the Wiki page for Helsinki? That seems a little worrisome. Is it ok to do that? Doesn't seem like a reliable source to me, but I might be missing something. 3. Not sure where you got the info on the majority of flights going to Vantaa from your Helsinki airport website source. You may want to link to a more specific page (e.g., an "about" page on the airport website, which lists the relevant details.)

References still needs work. 14 has date problems. If you click on the number where you've cited it, you can edit, and adjust the date format to work (usually, it's just some weird formatting issue, in my experience). Also, does reference 7 really lack an author? Seems like there would be some info you could manually input there.

Also, for academic sources, it's helpful if you narrow down the page numbers to the pages you've actually used in your edit. Again, you can edit page numbers by clicking on the citation number, then clicking edit.

Ok: I've recommended a lot here. I know you're putting hard work into this, and I'm confident you'll end up with a good edit! If you have questions on anything I've said, *or* if you'd like me to take a second look as we get closer to the due date, just send me a message, either here or on D2L. Hang in there--you've got this! Joshua Gramley (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

6/9/2019 Evaluation by User:BethanyJJohnson

• Points: 32/40
• Grade: 80%

Spelling/Grammar

Nearly meets standard

-"Pieces outside of Tennispalatsi include about 200 public art pieces" you've used 'pieces' twice in one sentence. Maybe rearrange to something like "There are about 200 public art pieces outside of Tennispalatsi".

-"and all art held in property owned by the city." I keep reading this over and over and can't seem to understand what you are trying to say. maybe "all art is held in property"?

-"Finnish contemporary arts.." I'm 99% sure this was just a typo, but you may want to remove that extra period!

-"The architecture in the museum is deemed a major architectural landmark for the Nordic region.[3]" The architecture of the pieces in the museum, or the architecture of the museum itself?

-"The site of the museum was in spotlight" Perhaps this should be "was in the spotlight" (or find another way to phrase it"

-In the beginning of the "music" section, you use the phrase "born and raised" twice in the same paragraph. Maybe find an alternative for the second.

-"as was mezzo-soprano Monica Groop." Should be "as was the mezzo-soprano Monica Groop."

-"Helsinki was also in 1983 the first ever city to host the World Championships in Athletics." Odd wording here. Perhaps you can rearrange it to something like "Also, in 1983 Helsinki was the first city to host the IAAF World Championships in Athletics" (using the event's full title).

-I don't think the motorways in your roads section need to be italicized.

Language

Nearly meets standard

-"The museum building itself, a national romantic style neomedieval castle, is a tourist attraction." This sentence could maybe use some rearranging.

-"Many widely renowned and acclaimed bands" a bit repetitive.

-"The site of the museum was in spotlight", I'm not a huge fan of the "spotlight" usage here, it doesn't seem professional, but I could be wrong.

My suggestion here is to read your article out loud a few times so you can catch the words and phrases that don't seem academic, that way you can polish the language and make it shine like the academic project you've worked so hard on.

Organization

Nearly meets standard

Seems well-organized to me, just a few sections that have multiple one-sentence paragraphs. Maybe combine your one or two-sentence paragraphs that are under the same subject together?

Coding

Meets standard

Seems in order here.

Validity

Meets standard

Nothing seems like false information, but it's hard to know without citations there!

Completion

Meets standard

You certainly have plenty of information here!

Relevance

Nearly meets standard

-"following Lordi's win in 2006." Who's Lordi? Maybe "Finish native Lordi" so we have some context?

Sources

Nearly meets standard

-Even though this is a project on Wikipedia, I would not count it as a valid source. For the wiki page you use as a source, maybe go back and see what sources were used for that page and use those sources.

Citations

Does not meet standard

-As I've learned from everyone's peer reviews on my own edits, make sure your citations follow your punctuation marks, and that there aren't any mid sentence. For example, "The biggest historical museum in Helsinki is the National Museum of Finland[1], which displays a vast historical collection from prehistoric times to the 21st century." should be "The biggest historical museum in Helsinki is the National Museum of Finland, which displays a vast historical collection from prehistoric times to the 21st century.[1]" (this makes it more readable)

-Please add more citations to your "museums", "music", "art", "media", "sports", and "transport" sections. You shouldn't be stating any facts that aren't followed by a claim, even if it's one at the end of each paragraph (if all of the info from said paragraph really only came from one source).

References

Nearly meets standard

-A lot of your references could have more information in them. I'd suggest that you go back through and edit each of them to make sure they all have the necessary information.

BethanyJJohnson (talk) 22:28, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

6/12/19 Evaluation by GbrooksPDXStudent

• Points: 44

Spelling/Grammar Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Read through the whole thing was thoroughly impressed by the choice of words and attention to spelling, excellent.

Language Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Definitely reads well and has the tone one would expect from a well-organized page.

Organization Meets Standard: 4

Nothing eye popping but certainly seems well laid out and certainly easy to read.

Coding Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Coding appeared perfect, along with the standard formating of the whole piece.

Validity Exceeds Standard: 4.5

All of your information was up to date, interesting, and academic. I doubt I could find a single source that wasn't correct.

Completion Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Above and beyond in terms of size, amount of information, and detail provided.

Relevance Exceeds Standard: 4.5

No information seems irrelevant or misused. Definitely a relevant piece should I ever visit Helsinki.

Sources Exceeds Standard: 4

As stated in relevance and validity, your page was full of important and academic sources.

Citations Exceeds Standard: 4.5

Citations are in an excellent format, used appropriately and easily linking to the pages they specify.

References Meets Standard: 4

All linked and referenced accordingly, nothing too crazy but definitely meeting the standard.

GbrooksPDXStudent (talk) 06:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

6/14/2019 Evaluation by DrMichaelWright

DrMichaelWright (talk) 12:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Not clearly marking which new material is your own makes it very cumbersome to grade. I've had to do it for you to see what it is you actually did. When I figured out what that was, I had little to be impressed with - especially as I continued digging.

• Points: 26/40
• Grade: 65%

Spelling/Grammar

Does not meet standard.

• "...in 1640, and having a current student...." you mean, '...which has a...'.
• "The school is well known for their arts..." The school is singular.
• "University of Helsinki has a strong biology school, with the sub departments of toxicology and pharmacology." There's something wrong here.
• "... in regards to Familial Cancers." Do not capitalize.
• "...Petersburg, that..." either omit comma or substitute 'that' with 'which'.
• "After this railways construction, many believed it helped integrate..." So has it been built or not? (It has not.)
• "...common mode of transport to other Baltic countries are by ferry." 'Mode' is singular.

Language

Nearly meets standard.

• "...this local Finnish university..." You're still talking about the country's dominant university, right?
• "Helsinki's airport also has strong ties..." Which one? You just mentioned there are three, and the one you probably mean (Helsinki Airport) you just got through saying was not in Helsinki.

Organization

Nearly meets standard.

• Your header 'University' should follow suit with the others and be plural.
• Why would you add a section on 'university' in the Culture section, when there is already one in the Education section?

Coding

Meets standard.

• Why was the link to Länsiväylä removed? Removing the link to Itäväylä, which is red, created a lack-of-space typo. Removing red links is not necessarily a good thing.

Validity

Does not meet standard.

• "...teaching drama to the Finnish people." All of them?
• "University of Helsinki has a strong biology school, with the sub departments of toxicology and pharmacology." This is not a true statement, nor does the source you cite say anything of the source.

Completion

Nearly meets standard.

• There is very little new text added, given the assignment. 1 or 2 sentences do not make a paragraph.

Relevance

Nearly meets standard.

• I'm not sure if the 'A major finding at this local Finnish' rises to the level of renown required. Was there an award, like a Nobel prize, handed out?
• "The majority of flights coming in and out of the European Union fly into Vantaa, a neighboring city of Helsinki." That's because, as the preceding paragraph mentions, Vantaa is where Helsinki Airport is actually located. This statement is misleading.

Sources

Does not meet standard.

• Wikipedia MUST not cite Wikipedia. It's even worse to cite the article to which you're supposed to be adding.
• The Frank et al. source does not make the claim about Helsinki that you say it does. The term Helsinki only appears on that page once.
• Kiasma's statement about itself is dubious.
• The article "Rail Baltica" does not appear in the indicated issue of Railway Gazette International. There's only an unrelated news blurb.

Citations

Does not meet standard.

• Your colleagues made good comments about the placement of your citations. It is sometimes okay to put a citation in the middle of the sentence, provided that the end of the sentence does not draw any information from the source in question, and is supported by a different citation.
• Also, Bethany is right about the placement of citations in relation to punctuation.
• There should also not be any spaces between the preceding punctuation and the citation note.
• "The most common mode of transport to other Baltic countries are by ferry. Helsinki has many ships that travel all across the area." Claim is unsupported.

References

Does not meet standard.

• There are numerous reference errors.
  • Frequent lack of publication dates.
• Missing page indicators for print references.
• The Helsinki running day web page does not have the information the supported material says it does. Maybe there's a sub-page?
• It is best to avoid pipes in the titles of references, even when you put a | to stop the code from messing up.