User talk:Avevanduz/sandbox

The organizational edits have made this article looks much better. I read your note on the article talk page and saw that you still plan on editing this article further. Looking forward to seeing the final result.

A thing that could help is adding more link to the article. You can link simple things such as DNA and amino acid.

Tomhoang18 (talk) 16:01, 4 April 2017 (UTC) Tomhoang18 (talk) 16:00, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

This is a good informative article! You use encyclopedic tone well and definitely get across what was important about this experiment. You have very few spelling / grammar errors as well. A couple of suggestions: 1961 is said twice in first sentence, seems repetitive. Saying what pages the experiment is described on seems weird. The amount of quotations in here with nothing in between also seems somewhat strange. It is definitely some useful information but see if you can synthesize this down, explain some of it yourself and leave what you think is the most important quote. For the results, could say how it was discovered to be applicable to all forms of life. You also say 64 possible codons and then reference the assigning of 61, what about the other 3? The comma in this sentence is weird: These assignments, once established also proved to be nearly universal. Would change to: Once established, these assignments proved to be…. It is hard to access but it looks like your sources are a research article and an autobiography – try to find something more neutral. Anhill95 (talk) 06:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)