Reflection on Project 2

1. I revised a lot more for this project than for the other one. I felt that the revision process was more detailed this time because we were asked to do more detailed work. I revised a few wordy sentences, I helped analyse my introduction and conclusion really well, and I helped make the writing flow better with less shifts and the use of commas.
2. My organization and my thesis were only changed slightly. I think Project 1 was the most rearranging I did between the two. I did update my thesis in order to make it less wordy. I chopped it into multiple sentences to help it flow better.
3. I provided these changes because my peers pointed out how wordy and confusing they were. As a writer, sometimes it is hard to understand what the reader may find confusing or wordy because the words fall from your head. A review or two helps make it clear what is unclear. 
4. By being more understandable a writer becomes more credible than a writer who is confusing. Wordy sentences may also come across as ramblings, a result of someone who doesn't know what they are talking about trying to discuss that topic. 
5. These changes help a peer see the rhetorical value of the article. Because I am intelligible, my readers will understand more, take away from the text more, and be able to understand the credibility of the article more. 
6. I needed to update my sentence structure a lot. I am a wordy writer and that led to a lot of confusion for my peer reviewers. 
7. My purpose is easier to understand because of these changes. By being more credible, the resources I suggest become more credible.
8. I don't think I altered the conventions of the genre in which I was writing because the genre was picked for me. 
9. As a writer, it is always helpful to analyze your own work and to have others analyze it as well. This will be helpful in the next project when I need to write again. I will try to be more attentive to the common mistakes I made this time around in the next project piece.