Wednesday 11/16

I like the lede for the Occupy article that asks a question at the end. It leaves me wanting an answer but knowing there isn't one. There was a lot of vague spots in the article concerning who was being quoted or sourced, mostly when the writer wrote, "they said." I just wish there was a more concrete source. The next article I read was the novelist opening a bookstore. I felt that a delayed lede would have served the article better, perhaps by taking the third to last paragraph with all of its description and twisting it into a lede. Lastly I read the chimichanga article, where the lede actually made me laugh because of the line "circling the chimichanga." This article was very repetitive in that it keeps mentioning how Arizona wants to make the "chimi" the state food. I felt that the quote from Sharisse Johnson would have fit better in between the second and third paragraphs. I also felt that the writer should not have written, "Hold up there," unless it was a direct quote from Carlotta Flores. On the A21 I didn't like how the writer put in "actually." If you're going to say something, say it straight out without having to correct yourself. I also found a spelling error, which is always fun ("calorie," not "caloric"). Lastly I feel that the writer should have introduced Tom Miller earlier in the piece instead of the last paragraph because it made the ending chunky. If he had introduced Miller earlier, he could have just used the quote he made in the last paragraph and gave the article a better ending.