Peer Review #2

I once again had the opportunity to review more projects from a wide variety of subjects and genre forms. These review processes are pivotal to understanding why certain things need to be fixed in my own project and why certain things were done well.

For this second review process, I reviewed two projects. The first was a QRG from Eren Arbac called
The Whistleblower of Olympus. The second project I reviewed was a video essay from Nicholas Hoover in an untitled Putin Video Essay.

My own project was affected by the review process of these two projects. Firstly I learned that I need to make sure my project is fun and engaging in a way to where the average reader will be entertained and informed at the same time. I learned that a lot of people are doing QRG's for this project and that in order for mine to stand out it must clearly define the controversy, both sides of the controversy's argument, and simultaneously must be interesting.

One of the top three problems in this draft QRG are a lack of explanation of the effect the controversy had on many stakeholders. My peers emphasized the stakeholders a lot more than I did. Another problem I had in my draft was a possible lack of clarity on what the event was behind the controversy and emphasis on where the event occurred. Lastly another problem I might have is the lack of explanation of the controversy itself, I realized how important it was to explain plainly what the controversy was. I plan on going back into my draft and re-emphasizing these sections as well as possibly just completely adding in new sections possibly.

One of the strengths of my draft were the development of the background of the controversy, I felt that I explained what led up to the controversy quite well. I also feel that I did quite a good job at explaining where the current state of the controversy is right now, a feature that is unique to my QRG when I compare it to my peers QRG's. Another thing that I feel that went well in the draft is the explanation of both sides of the argument to the controversy. Many of my peers didn't do so well in this category so I am glad that I put an emphasis on that. I plan on emphasizing these strengths by going back and expanding some on them and then repeating the process for other parts of the QRG to make the entire article a strength, or at least that is the hope.

Anonymous, "Jon Favreau Reviewing a Speech With President Obama"
via Wikipedia, Public Domian