Rmc203c2’s Weblog

Weblog article peer review form

Weblog Article Peer Review Form B – Second Review 

Writer’s Name Rogier Scheinck

Assessor’s name Kimberly vegting

Date 14-10-2007 

Rating Scale: 1 = Yes 2 = Somewhat 3 = No 

Rate the article by giving a 1, 2 or 3 for each question. Read the article once to geta general idea of what it is about, then read it a second time to rate it. 

1. Is the topic interesting? 1 

2. Is the title original and appropriate? 1

3. Is the introduction complete? 2

4. Is the body of your article complete? 1

5. Is the conclusion well-developed? 1

6. Is the article well-organized overall? 2

7. Is the article easy to understand? 1

8. Is the article interesting to read? 1

9. Has any plagiarised material been removed? Wasn’t any plagiarism  

Do you feel that the writer has improved the article? Why or why not? Be specific.

I think the article is improved because:-The article has a body now and good title. -The subject is explained better. -Nice article to read.

Has the writer changed the article adequately according to your suggestions forimprovement of your first assessment? Describe the changes and state specificallywhether you think they are an improvement.

-In the first acticle the benefits weren’t clear now they are.-In the second article speaks directly to the reader.-The second article had is longer, has more words and also more body.  

Are you happy to have this article on your weblog? Why or why not? Be specific.

I am happy to put this article on our weblog because I think it’s an interesting subject to read about and the article is easy to read. 

Give the writer this completed form.