I have outlined paragraphs that would benefit from greater conciseness and clarity in the feedback link. I think the conclusion could use some reworking to zero in on a central point, instead of recapping general references to techniques used in the articles. The specific uses of ethos, pathos, and logos could benefit from more specific examples. As stated above, there are no direct quotes or citations and the references to the aspects of the rhetorical triangle feels really general.

I think Xiaoxu avoids evaluation for the most part, but I have highlighted some sections in the feedback link that seem to be more evaluation than analysis. I have highlighted and commented in the feedback link which paragraphs could benefit from more focus on a central point, as well as topic sentences. There is very little use of transition words and sentences, I think if Xiaoxu were to outline the flow of his paper in the introduction it would help him transition from each section to the other more smoothly. There is very little mention of the format/layout of the articles, so it is hard to say if the paper matches it or not. Xiaoxu's visual cues are very easy to follow, I think there just needs to be better transition from section to section. There is no question 11 on the peer review page.

There is a sample of one of the comments that I got. 1. Xiaoxu's introduction discusses rhetorical analysis, explains what it is and what is should be comprised of, but he does not discuss the discourse in which he is analyzing. I think there could be a smoother transition between his explanation of what rhetorical analysis is and how it relates to the broader discourse of users of social media. 2. There is very little mention of the layout/format of the selected articles, although Xiaoxu does discuss the use of ethos, pathos, and logos at length. 3. I would like to see more analysis providing examples of the purpose of certain paragraphs and how they incorporate ethos, pathos, and logos, and less summary of what they are. 4. Xiaoxu has multiple mentions to the articles and what is being explained, but none are specific quotes that are cited correctly. I think this would help clarify the points he makes when he mentions the names of the articles if he were to use specific examples. 5. There is more summary than analysis of what the articles state, and I think incorporating more signal phrases will help you change your paper to include more of the latter.

this assignment I need to tell you it might not that hard than you imagine. For the first part, you can just make about 5 suggestions for each paper. For the second part, you can just copy the questions, then give a short answer under the questions. Which means you don't need to organize like writing a real essay. Also, there is no exactly right answer, so just read the paper and find something to answer these question. Since English is second language, so this assignment might cost too much time for me. One more thing about the comments, just like I said, copy all of questions, then give a short answer under the question. You don't need to write more thing, just answer the question. Thanks. These questions are kind of rubric for every draft, which means you need to follow each draft then answer these questions.

I have two requirements. First, this is a peer review assignment; I need you to find some words or sentences in the draft that could be change, delete or replace to make these drafts better. And you could give some suggestion as well. BUT you don't need to change it for me, just highlight them or add comments or use the review tool in the Word. Second, write a comment for each draft, please follow the question in the instruction file. There are 4 drafts in the ARIYD draft file. So please make sure that I need 4 comments for this assignment.