Talk:Toxic leukoencephalopathy/Georgia Tech Intro to Neuroscience

Peer Review from Bennettalterman (talk) 05:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)Bennett Alterman
-

_______________
 * 1) Quality of Information: 1
 * 2) Article size: 2
 * 3) Readability: 2
 * 4) Refs: 2
 * 5) Links: 2
 * 6) Responsive to comments: 1
 * 7) Formatting: 1 (Doesn't have class link on Talk page)
 * 8) Writing: 2
 * 9) Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2
 * 10) Outstanding: 1 (Good for lay-people)

Total:  16     out of 20

- 1. Quality of Information: 1 (most of the references don't have date) 2. Article size: 2 3. Readability: 2 4. Refs: 2 5. Links: 2 6. Responsive to comments: 7. Formatting: 2 8. Writing: 2 9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2 10. Outstanding?: 1 (the summary is lacking in content and less informative) ______________ Total: 18/20 Adewale3 (talk) 06:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

- 1. Quality of Information:2

2. Article size:2

3. Readability: 2

4. Refs:2

5. Links:2

6. Responsive to comments:2

7. Formatting:2

8. Writing:2

9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page:2

10. Outstanding:1 (if you could give examples of people being treated it could make your article more relatable.)

Total:   19    out of 20

Christopherjbaker1993 (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC)