User talk:Claire.ren/sandbox

Really good work-- nice reorganization of the institutional information into its own section. First sentence actually explains what the act is now! Your sources seem credible and not more biased than one would expect. Nicely done. LinkageDis (talk) 17:08, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Overall, I think this Wikipedia draft provides a strong overview of relevant regulatory measures taken in the 20th Century, and it does so in a very factual, encyclopedic fashion. Cutting straight to the point, I noticed a few underdeveloped/inaccurate sections that need attention. Under "Teaching", you really only mention the evolution controversy in the Scopes Trial, but the discussion seems underwhelming considering the critical role the Scopes Trial played in the evolutionary debate and the social impact it had, regardless of the fact that Scopes was found guilty. Also, the section only discusses the evolution controversy? Are there any other debates that would make 'science education...a controversial subject in the United States"?

Also, and I am really only pointing this out because my own Wikipedia article and Scipedia article discuss it, your section on the Nuremberg Code is somewhat inaccurate. The Code was not written following the trials of the Third Reich doctors, but was embedded within the trials and judgements. Also, there are ten important ethical principles detailed by the Nuremberg Code, with informed consent only constituting the first principle, and thus I think the discussion could be expanded quite a bit. Also, the sentence "It was developed..." is slightly vague because while you are referencing the Declaration of Helsinki, the paragraph focuses on the Nuremberg Code, and so when I first read the sentence I was confused.

Finally, in "Nuclear Energy Research," the sentence "The NRC has oriented more towards risk assessment and safety regulation" is very confusing and perhaps incomplete? -Keiradams (talk) 01:56, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Overall, great draft, lots of relevant information. I would appreciate more development of the "biomedical" section introduction. The section on human subject research is great, but the animal welfare act could use some more content, or at the least a link to the relevant Wikipedia article about it. I'm also interested in how teaching regulations have developed over the 20th and early 21st centuries-- surely there have been more acts enacted since Scopes?

Good job taking an encyclopedic tone. However, it's a very broad topic and I'd appreciate more of a cohesive narrative that gives me an idea of how these types of regulation relate to one another if they do, and how these legislations came to be with regard to public involvement, etc. LinkageDis (talk) 03:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)