Questions you should ask yourself when critiquing peers

[childrenschamp4life]

1. What do you like about this script?
2. What do you have questions about or, are confused by?
3. What suggestions might you make?
4. Other random comments

[Ishta]

How about:

5) What is it about the part/s that don't work for me that makes them not work?

[GeeGee55]

How about: In no particular order

6. Do I know the author's intentions for the piece? Is it for publication or personal enjoyment? Not everyone writes for publication.

7. Considering the author's skill level, what are appropriate comments to provide to help that person improve the piece?

8. What do I know about craft - about character development, description, pacing, plot, etc. that would benefit this particular piece of work

9. Do I make it clear that the comments are my opinion only and the author should keep in mind that what I like may not necessarily be what he likes or needs (I don't really think that like is the appropriate word)

10. Am I commenting only on the work and not on the author? Am I providing comments to seem smarter than the author or am I trying to share helpful knowledge?

11. What am I learning by doing this critique?

[polymath]

12. What kind of story is it? Risk-reward conflict resolution, revelation ending, slife-of-life vignette, anecdote, spectacle; conventional or traditional genre, experimental, literary; setting, plot, idea, character, or event genre (SPICE); primary reader, middle grade, young adult, or adult; flat or round, static or dynamic central characters; nonnarrated or narrated, overt or covert narrator.

13. Am I responding as a reader, a writer, or an editor?

14. How might I respond to virtues without overshooting the mark?

15. How might I respond favorably to vices clearly without imposing my judgments and sentiments, without giving offense?
   //I like the imperative, ominiscient, omnipresent, omnipotent authorial voice mixed with narrator reporting and
   viewpoint character perceptions and cognitions, reminiscient of Vonnegut's Breakfast of Champions.//

16. Are the themes, motifs, and messages unifying, accessible, timely, and relevant?

17. What level of rapport do I feel with the central premises, ie., setting, plot, idea, character, and event and voice.

18. If it's not to my preferences, can I remain objective and offer commentary that enhances?

[cheekychook]

19. Am I clear on the type of critique this person is hoping to get? Does he/she want a line edit? An overall commentary on plot/style? A list of only the most glaring errors or inconsistencies? A general impression of the characters or themes? Comments on a particularly thing like dialogue or setting? A thumbs up or thumbs down?