User talk:Anjalisankar/sandbox

Hi,

Your additions to the article are interesting and good. I would incorporate a few sources into your additions. By doing so, you will not only make the additions more "verifiable" but could add some perspective maybe using quotes.

Caroline's Peer Review
Your addition to the article is really good! It adds incredible detail that was missed in the article initially. You also did well when it came to remaining neutral, which is key on Wikipedia. One thing that I would suggest is to cite your addition properly. Also, you only have one source for your entire section, so maybe try to find some other sources that confirm what is in your section. Caromullen (talk) 05:34, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Sophia's peer review

I really like that you added the two branches of skepticism. I did not know that that was a scientific part of skepticism, and I think a lot of people will find this really informative. Everything is actually extremely informative, and the source looks credible. Nice work!!! Going along with what Caroline said, maybe try finding another source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophiafron99 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Izzy's Peer Review
Additions are very god, detailed, unbiased and able to portray both sides of any argument within the subject. Written very nicely. I wouldn't change anything.Isabellasiragusa (talk) 14:41, 23 October 2018 (UTC)