User talk:Alyson.east/sandbox

Article Feedback
Really nice work with this! I just have a couple of suggested edits before you can move the page over. Just send me a quick message when you're done.

- I would edit the sentence about how novelty is defined as: "Novelty is typically defined relative to some baseline, usually modern, and may be quantified statistically."

- ..."and may consist of" should read: "and may consist of extant species that coexist in assemblages not seen today, or assemblages with introduced species."

- instead of "interactions with" I would add "knowledge of." There are also some novel ecosystems emerging today, though! They often arise in places where introduced species. See work by Ariel Lugo as one example in Puerto Rico, and edit this accordingly to add that they are emerging in modern systems due to invasive species.

- Cite the first sentence in the theory section.

- I recommend splitting off the "late-glacial no-analog communities" as its own section, and highlighting that these have been recognized in the pollen recrod since the 1960's (reference -- read Williams and Jackson Frontiers paper if you need to find the ref).

- The late glacial no-analog communities weren't due to dispersal, though -- this currently reads as though the migrating taxa mixing together was the cause. Your later sentence about migration IS framed correctly (that individualistic response of species caused them to migrate in response to the changing climate). This was actually an early hypothesis for the no-analog communities, but has since been rejected. Our best ideas include novel climates, as well as the extinction of ice age herbivores.

Let me know if you have questions! IceAgeDoc (talk) 23:37, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Evaluating an Article
Nice work -- you've identified a lot of clear areas for improvement, paying attention to important issues like organization, language, references, and its rating. I would recommend also checking out the Talk page, to see what else has been flagged, and also how up-to-date the edits are (e.g., does it seem abandoned?). Nice work! IceAgeDoc (talk) 01:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review: These changes would be very useful to the article and would definitely make it more user friendly. You guys have really good ideas and when these changes are implemented the article will be much improved. Good job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachlepage (talk • contribs) 21:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)