User talk:Abrooski/sandbox

Hi David,

All your contributions look great. You used clear language, lots of links and references, and even managed to include some images, so all of my notes are going to be little nitpicky things...

I'm fairly sure that decades should be written without an apostrophe (unless they're possessive for some reason) -- "late 1950s" vs. "late 1950's", etc.

"Not irritating to the skin or other delicate membranes of the body." is a fragment -- maybe work it into the preceding sentence?

"anything beyond this 1 mile distance is relatively safe and do not exhibit proof of negative effects" -- should "do" become "does"?

I really couldn't find anything else significant. Looks good!

Kotuby (talk) 19:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

=Main Points= The article hits on a topic that I consider to be relevant to modern times and is one that I'm working on in my Transport Lab, but when I first started reading the article I was left a bit confused. The author might consider adding in a short introduction summarizing the major points of the article. Later in the article, there are two sections: "Uncertainty of Negative Effects" and "Controversy in Fracking." I have trouble seeing if there are major differences between the two headings and would suggest possible combining the two. There are also a lot phrases that could probably still be hyperlinked, including the bullets in the list of fluid characteristics and FLA materials.

Minor Points
The author could reorganize some of his sentences to either be more direct or to make the subject more clear. In the second paragraph the author says "Not irritating to the skin or other delicate membranes of the body." The sentence has no subject and should be revised. In the second sentence of "Fluid loss control additive," the last sentence seems to be a run on and should probably be separated for clarity. The title of the section also needs correct capitalization.

Jsphjh (talk) 03:24, 11 November 2014 (UTC)