User:Uambra/Sexual arousal/Guadgamero Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Uambra


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Uambra/Sexual_arousal?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Sexual arousal

Evaluate the drafted changes
I put an extra space to section things out according to which paragraph they relate to.

I got hung up on "act to reduce" in the second sentence about orgasms decreasing stress. I think that can be too easily read as people who masturbate are doing it with that intention. To be more impartial/neutral, I think it could just be said that orgasms can/may reduce stress and increase oxytocin among thus who take part in it.

In a similar vein, I'm not sure about the sentence regarding partners cheating. I think just having the fact that orgasms strengthen bonds would be fine with source, unless the source says there's a very absolute direct relation to orgasms and lack of cheating.

a woman and her husband --> a woman and their spouse?

According to a well-developed research study of 7,000 --> According to a study of 7,000? I think "well-developed" adds like bias, no matter how good the study is

different sorts of pains, psychological or physical -- I think combining the distress sentence with the one before it seems to flow more

I don't know about "justifying the fact" that orgasms make people live longer. I think just presenting the increased life span in relation to more orgasms will do the job of people drawing conclusions.

"There was also a vivid depiction on the effect of marital satisfaction in women and ratings of heightened pleasure, whereas women who recorded more orgasms tended to live longer than those with fewer orgasms" I'm not sure how to word it, but this sentence threw me off/ distracted me. I think it's the marital satisfaction part that seems very out of place, followed by the "whereas". Maybe the sentence can start with solely "Women who recorded..." to fit more in line with the paragraph's theme of long life.

The sentence starting with "There is also a possibility" is followed by one saying "therefore" people who orgasm more look more youthful, which I don't think fits well. I think just keeping the first "possibility" sentence with a source is all that is needed, since the second is saying it as if it's a fact.

"Therefore, there is no need for one to end sexual activities in the name of getting old." This part made me giggle (lighthearted) which would be cool outside of a wikipedia article, but sadly I don't think its place is here.

"10b-17B-dihydroxyestra-1,4-dien-3-one treatment" is there any way to link this to another wikipedia article about that treatment? Or to explain it in layman's terms? That next sentence can do the job, but I wonder if there's a way to use just one instead of the super scientific one followed by the in other words sentence.

I feel bad but the science stuff in this paragraph did turn me away from reading for a bit, and I imagine the same might happen to casual wiki users? The previous paragraphs did not explain the studies in this much detail, which makes the balance kind of off.

Again I don't think "therefore" sentences are best suited to wikipedia articles, not at the end of this paragraph. Just describing effects and letting the reader draw conclusions, if those conclusions are not very very explicit in the studies they're sourced from.

" Besides the importance mentioned above, some of the other" --> "Some of the other..." ?

" regularly are a risk of " maybe just saying they could be at greater risk?

"Orgasms the right way (not projected wrongly through porn) also improves..." I'm not sure if this can be explained differently? I didn't know there was a difference between orgasms depending on how one gets there, or how porn directly effects it."Furthermore, pain in the body..." The first paragraph talks about pain, could this be moved there?

Overall, I just think more sources throughout the sentences. Especially if the facts are directly linked to a source. A more passive voice, letting the reader draw conclusions through what is presented unless there is a 100% direct link between things.