Talk:Angelica Stacy

Untitled

 * Nanobright (talk) 03:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)class added with ORES script
 * Nanobright (talk) 22:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)updated article class to C

Feedback
Hi. A little feedback on your draft
 * While the subject of the article seems notable, I'm not sure that it's clearly conveyed. I would include "best known for" in the lead section. (It's important to make an assertion of notability up front. If you do that, then (a) you've forced yourself to think about this, and make sure it's covered in the article, and (b) you give readers some sense of the person's notability up front.)
 * The Awards section is too long. Focus on notable awards. Make sure they're sourced - ideally from a source that's independent of her.
 * Add something about her contributions to science and to chemistry education. She has a paper in chemistry education with a citation count of 249 (per GScholar). That's a really big number. She also has an intro textbook to her name. These suggest to me that she's a big deal in science education.
 * Make sure you're formatting things right. Inline references are always preferable to external links. The "notable publications" section has just one link that's formatted as a weblink to ScienceDirect, when it probably should be a templated journal link. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2019 (UTC)