Feedback

Hey, Maggie!

You're page is so close to being done! It looks really good for sure. I can't even really say "look out for grammatical stuff", cause I don't see any errors!

I'm going to try not to repeat anyone else here, though I will definitely say to go with Jessica's suggestion about the citations, because you have a rather daunting amount. Reducing the list somehow will make it seem less...overwhelming.

So: I am not a big fan of sub-sub sections unless their necessary. For your different kinds or archives (religious/secular), I would suggest deleting the overall header, and then tweaking the title (something like Archival Institutions: Religious/Archival Institutions: Secular"), and doing it that way.

Just a suggestion, definitely don't need to follow it.

Good luck!

I almost forgot! I think you're not with the other "History" people in the course list because you used a single instead of a double dash like they did. Don't know if this matters to you, though I know I was disappointed you weren't all together!

Hello Rosie,

I'm still going through grammatical edits, though the comment of support is great.

I get what you mean by my list being overwhelming. Again, I'm not sure how much that will reduce my footnotes. I really wanted to make it columned and a smaller font, but I can't figure that out at the moment.

I will consider the Archival Institutions section further. So long as I can include that line about overlap somehow I think it could work.

Thanks!

P.S. Yes, I realize that my page is separated from theirs due to the dash. Do you think it's worth it renaming the page? I can do it pretty easily.

The Archival institution stuff is totally up to you. That's probably just me being nitpicky, anyway.

As for renaming, it's up to you. It's a minor thing, and only worth it if you think it is. Besides, I'm not sure how much it matters in the long run, ya know?

Seriously, your page is great.

Maggie is trying to break away from the rest of us history people with her special dash...

Also, I too battled with the columned footnotes and even though I had the correct code and everything, it wouldn't work. Maybe its a UBC thing?

It may be a UBC wiki thing. They don't have anything about customized footnotes on their help pages. Though i find it odd that it wouldn't accept code from "regular" Wiki.