User talk:Paulinearl/Draft - Revision history

Wohlgemuth: /* Feedback */

2024-06-17T04:52:57Z

Feedback

Wohlgemuth: /* Feedback */ new section

2024-06-15T02:40:40Z

Feedback: new section

Paulinearl at 12:17, 3 June 2024

2024-06-03T12:17:40Z

Paulinearl at 12:17, 3 June 2024

2024-06-03T12:17:14Z

Saphirar at 15:44, 30 May 2024

2024-05-30T15:44:02Z

Saphirar: Created page with "Hello Pauline thanks for the interesting article, I think it's good that the definition section is just made into one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be conf..."

2024-05-30T15:41:33Z

Created page with "Hello Pauline thanks for the interesting article, I think it's good that the definition section is just made into one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be conf..."

New page

Hello Pauline thanks for the interesting article, I think it's good that the definition section is just made into one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be confused.

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:52, 17 June 2024
Line 12:		Line 12:
	# The draft is still very superficial. It does not really explain things or link to explanations. You chose a very difficult topic.		# The draft is still very superficial. It does not really explain things or link to explanations. You chose a very difficult topic.
	--[[User:Wohlgemuth\|wohlgemuth]] ([[User talk:Wohlgemuth\|talk]]) 02:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)		--[[User:Wohlgemuth\|wohlgemuth]] ([[User talk:Wohlgemuth\|talk]]) 02:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	: Please check point 2 of above list. You still do not say where you got which information from. --[[User:Wohlgemuth\|wohlgemuth]] ([[User talk:Wohlgemuth\|talk]]) 04:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:40, 15 June 2024
Line 3:		Line 3:

	Hello Saphira! Thankyou for your advice. But I only made the definition in one part, below the definition is a different discussion. Thankyou!		Hello Saphira! Thankyou for your advice. But I only made the definition in one part, below the definition is a different discussion. Thankyou!
		+
		+	== Feedback ==
		+
		+
		+	The main problem of your draft are these:
		+	# formatting; please follow the rules already outlined. Example: Your bullet lists all start with the placeholder text "Bulleted list item", that is nonsensical.
		+	# You do not cite in-text where you quoted / took which information from. Furthermore, you are using a reference from computer technology in your references. This is linguistics.
		+	# The draft is still very superficial. It does not really explain things or link to explanations. You chose a very difficult topic.
		+	--[[User:Wohlgemuth\|wohlgemuth]] ([[User talk:Wohlgemuth\|talk]]) 02:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:17, 3 June 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	Hello Pauline! Thankyou for the interesting article, I think its good if you can make the definition section to one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be confused to read.		Hello Pauline! Thankyou for the interesting article, I think its good if you can make the definition section to one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be confused to read.

−	Hello Saphira! Thankyou for your advice. But I only made the definition in one part. below the definition is a different discussion. Thankyou!	+	Hello Saphira! Thankyou for your advice. But I only made the definition in one part, below the definition is a different discussion. Thankyou!

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:17, 3 June 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:

	Hello Pauline! Thankyou for the interesting article, I think its good if you can make the definition section to one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be confused to read.		Hello Pauline! Thankyou for the interesting article, I think its good if you can make the definition section to one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be confused to read.
		+
		+	Hello Saphira! Thankyou for your advice. But I only made the definition in one part. below the definition is a different discussion. Thankyou!

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:44, 30 May 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Hello Pauline ~~thanks~~ for the interesting article, I think ~~it's~~ good ~~that~~ the definition section ~~is just made into~~ one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be confused.	+
		+	Hello Pauline! Thankyou for the interesting article, I think its good if you can make the definition section to one part, there is no need for two parts so as not to be confused to read.