User talk:APuma1/sandbox

Week 2: Evaluation of Physiology Page

In reading the page on physiology, I noticed a few things that could be changed. In the "women in physiology" section, sources are needed. Also, I believe this section can be done away with and the information placed in it can be moved into the history of physiology section. Its own section implies some framed bias.

From what I could see, the sources seemed to be reputable and of unbiased origins. However, the page is riddled with "citation needed" markings. I could not find any indication of closed paraphrasing or plagiarism. No bias from sources was noted.

There were some grammatical errors that should also be corrected.

The article mostly aligns with the topics we discussed in class and our class's definition of physiology and pathophysiology, as well as our discussion of the history of the word. More information is needed in the human physiology section, and inclusion of other physiologies are also needed on the page. More information could also be included in the history section.

APuma1 (talk) 03:14, 30 January 2017 (UTC)