Planet Profiling Series Premiere Results Thread

Zion:

Content: 29/30

The natural geographical features section is very well written and detailed! You provided a diligently descriptive account of Palinkratia’s geographical landscape by starting with a general, but sufficiently-detailed overall description to engage the reader. Then, you specifically mentioned the Great Rift and combined its description with a wide of adjectives that kept me constantly engaged. I really like how you managed to establish the importance of the landscape in relation to the Palikratians and other lifeforms and your decision to allude to more than one or two types of lifeforms existing on Palinkratia (i.e., the exotic lifeforms in addition to just the Palinkratians and mutated arthropods) gave a more completed picture of the planet’s environment. The section on the planet’s atmosphere and climate was also very descriptive and it was also clear and concise. I also liked how you kept relating the answers to the first question back the main planet’s species (i.e., the Palinkratians). By being able to constantly allude back to the Palinkratians, it made me acquire a sense that you have demonstrate great familiarity with the in-depth world you are building. Your manmade landmarks section was shorter, but was, once again, descriptive enough and relevant enough (to the primary species in question) to keep my eyes glued to the magazine article. I also liked how you deliberately didn’t complete the last two sentences, which facilitates an opportunity for the readers to interpret what the missing details could be. This works out really well because by this section, you have already established enough context and information, which allows readers to fill in the blanks.

Your response to the second question was also very descriptive, clear, and the subsections were concise. You broke down this entire section into different segments, which allowed me to progressively acquire an understanding of how the Palinkratians came to be. By doing so in segments, the text becomes less intimidating to read and encourages layman to keep reading. In other words, you divided this section into a step-by-step progressive guide that allows any reader to be willing to read the content despite some use of scientific terminology that the layman might not know about. This is a very good strategy for captivating and engaging the reader throughout the text. On top of that, your efforts to go above and beyond the expectations of the second question was evident when you discussed how the primary species bodies worked in detail and how they have mask-like faces for more than a single purpose. This does in fact add a sense of realism to the Palakratians because like us, our skins, or other parts of our anatomy function for different purposes. I also liked how you included a quote “Amongst the blaze of crimson and gold, beware the kaleidoscope's allure; for beauty can be a snare,” which helps add a sense of credibility to the magazine article (as if the information were facts).

The information relating to the third question was also very captivating to read. On top of the well-balanced and constant descriptive text, I really liked the use of making a call-back to the Palinkratian stripes system from the beginning of the text. The idea of introducing the stripe system at the beginning and coming back to it later for a more relevant case study in the planet’s history made the text feel less forced and I certainly am pleased with the amount of structured planning this magazine article has received. The story/history of King Aca’s story did feel a little rushed and I would have liked to know more about how he gradually became a tyrant in a paragraph or so. The legend of reuniting King Aca’s 15 pieces was also quite an interesting way to add a Pandora’s Box-like paranormal superstition to this world.

The way you responded to the fourth question was also great! Not only was the text sufficiently detailed and concise, but it also had a common trend – the answers here all have to do with the Queen. In other words, the culture and belief systems, the societal level and structure, and the politics and governance sections helped craft a multi-layered and multi-perspective understanding of the impact and importance of the monarchy system on the planet’s civilization.

Similar to the fourth question, your submission addressed the fifth and sixth questions in multiple ways. I really liked that you made another call-back to bio-luminescent flora from the second half of the history section in the last part of the fifth question.

Application of Dataset: 16/20

Whenever this submission has used the dataset, the information is very well expanded in the magazine article. You have always made an excellent attempt to create, describe, and explain phenomena when they are drawn directly from the dataset. For example, on top of simply listing out the hydrosphere details, you also deeply elaborated on how they affect Palinkratia’s geographical features. There is also a trend of explaining and elaborating the phenomena of heavy volcanism throughout the magazine article – not only have you mentioned how it relates or impacts the daily life of the civilization (question 5), but you also integrated its impacts throughout the rest of the article as well. Another well-established idea you constantly made with regard to the dataset was the way the planet’s constitutional monarchy functioned and how it affects the civilization on a cultural, societal, and political level. You also went above and beyond with the constitutional monarchy society by telling the reader how it works and how it is structured near the beginning of the submission and called-back to it later on in your answers to the fourth question.

For improvement, I would also suggest signaling the use of more details from the dataset. By “signaling,” I mean you should mention things like the temperature range of the climate (even if you already expanded on the details from the data). In other words, mention what the data says directly (i.e., the average temperature is 20 degrees Celsius…) then elaborate and expand on the details like the way you did with the climate. The same goes for the other dataset details. Part of the goal behind this task is to adhere to the dataset as close as you can without limiting your creativity. Sometimes, it’s good to explore what really seems more interesting for your magazine article, but try not to get too carried away from the actual “facts” from the data. Adhere to the data not only by elaborating on it, but also by mentioning what it says. Another criticism I would make is that you described the planet in such a way that made it seem like it was completely a volcanic wasteland. If you consider the low-resolution map given from the dataset, you will see that there is plenty of water on the planet, as further indicated from its hydrosphere statistic. For improvement, I would actually suggest toning down instances and inferences that this planet seems to be completely filled with volcanoes, lava, and volcanic activity. Finally, a small detail I want to point out is that the planet’s name is “Rind I,”  but I think I reasonably understand why you gave the planet is different name.

Creative Format: 19/20

This submission really felt like I was reading an actual magazine article throughout my first read through. You followed the features and style of a magazine article really well and the voice and purpose of the submission is very closely in-sync with that of your chosen format.

Visual Appeal: 8/10

The use and range of visuals in this magazine article is good! The use and positioning of the text varies from page to page, but is used appropriately depending on the type of page they are on. For example, the pages with major subheadings standout compared to the main text body and the use of a larger font size clearly helps the reader differentiate between subheading and the main text. The spacing between the text chunks is used in a way that helped me read the content and there were no instances in which I thought a paragraph became too long. Additionally, I was really captivated by your use of visuals! They are colorful and match the formatting of the text and the magazine article’s dark background. Leaving the last page blank was also a good idea in mimicking the submission-styled magazine article.

One of the issues I have with the formatting of the text is that it only has squared indentation on page 2, whereas the other pages don’t have the squared indentation. In addition, page 14 does not list the numbers properly (i.e., “1. Adaptation to Toxicity” is followed by “1. Resource Management” instead of “2. Resource Management”). Another issue I had with the formatting is that the visuals should be both appealing and consistent from start to finish – I felt that the use of visuals dwindled within the last 6 pages, which made the quality, although still good, less consistent. Finally, consider using more types of visuals - the images are great, but consider implementing a map or a type of diagram or a table to diversity your mode of communication.

Realism: 10/10

Excellent work!

Grammar, Spelling, Limited Jargon, and Readability: 9/10

There are no grammatical or spelling errors in this submission. The submission uses some scientific terminologies, but they are only used when the consistent level of language and descriptive requires it. Finally, the submission is very compelling, engaging, and interesting, making it easy to read!

TOTAL:  91/100