15
edits
Talk:What are “transitions”?: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
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. --[[User:Glucas|Glucas]] 11:05, 20 Oct 2004 (EDT) | 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. --[[User:Glucas|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. | |||
--[[User:Apitt329|Apitt329]] 13:36, 24 Mar 2005 (EST) | |||
This paper was easy to scan and understand without getting bored. The scrolling was very limited because you used bullets wich is a complement. Grammer, machanics,and styles are good.--[[User:Dflowers|Dflowers]] 13:41, 24 Mar 2005 (EST) | |||