Weblog Advertorial Peer Review Form B – Second Review
Writer’s Name Fleur van Ijperen
Assessor’s name Danny Taams
Date 20th of October 2007
Rating Scale: 1 = Yes 2 = Somewhat 3 = No
Rate the advertorial by giving a 1, 2 or 3 for each question. Read the advertorial
once to get a 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? 2
3. Is the introduction complete? (there is no introduction the way it is written)
4. Is the body of your advertorial complete? 1
5. Is the conclusion well-developed? (there is no conclusion the way it is written)
6. Is the advertorial well-organized overall? 1
7. Is the advertorial easy to understand? 1
8. Is the advertorial interesting to read? 1
9. Has any plagiarised material been removed? 3
Do you feel that the writer has improved the advertorial? Why or why not? Be specific.
Yes, she changed the time notification, the grammar and spelling mistakes.
Has the writer changed the advertorial adequately according to your suggestions for
improvement of your first assessment? Describe the changes and state specifically
whether you think they are an improvement.
She used a lot of “me” instead of “I” (Laura and ME = Laura and I) That’s a good improvement!
Are you happy to have this advertorial on your weblog? Why or why not? Be specific.
Yes, because I really like the idea of the diary. It is really nice and easy for the target group to read.
