Talk:What are “transitions”?: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Page could use a bit more information. There are some errors, especially when the author was listing points. | Page could use a bit more information. There are some errors, especially when the author was listing points. | ||
-Terence Heenan | -Terence Heenan | ||
Paper was well written and it had good points. Topic chosen was illustrated in an effective way for the internet. It was easy to scan for important information, and good examples were being used. Over all paper was well written and no grammatical errors were noticed. Paper was clear and it looks to need no further review by the author. Paper seemed to utilize the editing bar to its fullest. Good entry. | |||
--[[User:Apitt329|Apitt329]] 13:36, 24 Mar 2005 (EST) | |||
Revision as of 14:36, 24 March 2005
Good so far. Be sure you are citing all of your sources and providing a section for external links. Proofread some of your sentences for clarity. --Glucas 11:05, 20 Oct 2004 (EDT)
The examples could be a little clearer. -Amberly Keough
The entry is understandable and easy to read. There are a few errors with the bullets. D Davis
great wiki. easy to read. check for mistakes -Daniel Epps
Very helpful Lit wiki. I liked how you use a lot of bullets and headings. It made important things stand out. -Whitney Behel
This entry is organized and to the point. Anthony Jones
Page could use a bit more information. There are some errors, especially when the author was listing points. -Terence Heenan
Paper was well written and it had good points. Topic chosen was illustrated in an effective way for the internet. It was easy to scan for important information, and good examples were being used. Over all paper was well written and no grammatical errors were noticed. Paper was clear and it looks to need no further review by the author. Paper seemed to utilize the editing bar to its fullest. Good entry. --Apitt329 13:36, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)