User:Epbvx6/Space medicine/Ftwz9p Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

KalebMB1209


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:KalebMB1209/sandbox


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Space medicine

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

1. What does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?

The topic of choice has a lot of potential to show a good use with space medicine and how it has impacted normal medicine on earth.

2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

Needs more explantation of the different methods for muscular stimulation wher eone is mentioned in NMES, but it is not explained or provides a link to another wiki page.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

All of the statements need to have sources tied to it and generally needs statements to be less vague. along with the double statement about how it was heavyily influenced by space medicine.

Response to feedback

 * 1) Finding information regarding NMES/other methods of muscular stimulation as they pertain to Space Medicine, and finding these sources has been the primary challenge of this topic.
 * 2) Will definitely come back to address the grammar, thanks. Mostly a rough draft idea at the moment, but will certainly polish these things up over time, figuring out how sources fit into the drafted article additions.

Thanks for the feedback, much appreciated. Moving forward, am going to focus on finding more examples of muscle stimulation driven by space medicine and expanding the additions I am able to add into the article.