Talk:Diabetes and exercise

Peer Review for Diabetes Mellitus
What does the article (or section) do well: The article does a good job defining diabetes in the introduction and going through the relevant studies in detail.

What changes would you suggest overall: I would change the second heading from "excercise" to "prevention" and would possibly add more headings to organize the article flow. I would also cite all facts and statistics.

What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution: Add more subtopics within the article: "symptoms" "prevention" "risk factors" to put down a frame for other editors to add to.

Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own: I would like to go more into detail for the studies i mentioned in my own article.

Chung.esther (talk) 05:44, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review for Diabetes Mellitus
What does the article (or section) do well?

My first impression was that you wrote a great introductory paragraph. It was very concise, yet provides all the basic information and serves as a great foundation for the rest of your article. The whole article is well-written and easy to understand. There was no unnecessary information; everything supported your article. I found no grammatical errors or typos and your article avoided repetition. Even visually, it was appealing due to the subheadings and format. Over all, it was a great article, definitely Wikipedia quality.

What changes would you suggest overall?

My suggestions would be to cite more. I noticed that you cited at the end of each paragraph, but I think it would be beneficial to incorporate more than 5 references and cite after each sentence. As a general rule, I cite after each sentence that contains information which is not common sense. It would be better to over-cite than to plagiarize. There was one sentence I found to be a little awkward to read: “There has been lots of research done on the positive effects of physical activity on lowering glucose levels.” The research was not done ON the positive effects, but done TO DETERMINE the positive effects physical activity has on lowering glucose levels. When making revisions to your article, I would say the next step is to link some of the words in your article to other existing Wikipedia articles.

Examples of words you could add links to: “insulin,” “blood glucose,” “cardiovascular disease” etc.

Finally, I wanted to point out that the “Studies” section of your article resembles a short literature review. From my understanding, Wikipedia is not a place to summarize research studies, but instead a place to summarize more generally excepted information, collected from secondary sources. However, I may be wrong, in which I think you did an incredible job of summarizing the research studies.

What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution?

Big picture, not a lot needs to be done to improve this article.

Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own?

This article makes me want to improve the clarity of my own. I think yours is so well-written and easy to understand; I would love feedback on how to improve those qualities for my own Wikipedia article.

ElizahBecker (talk) 02:22, 27 February 2019 (UTC) Elizah Becker