User talk:Cocobry/sandbox

Hi! Your page is looking good! I like that you utilized the wiki internal link feature. It is very helpful for those who aren't science knowledgeable to understand everything you reference within your page. The page is very easy to read and understand for the most part. The research section is an interesting read as you separated the research and it's easier to see. I would probably add a little more to the treatment section or explain the type of surgeries needed. Overall, your page is very nice and looking almost finished! -Jessica Young

Hi, I thought that your abstract was very well written! I also liked how you gave a very brief explanation for the key points of the diagnosis, I think that it will greatly benefit the readers in becoming more familiar with each topic as they continue reading. I would also just say to work a little more detail into the treatment section and provide some information on the surgeries that are mentioned. Overall, it looks great! -Alexa Hurtado — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahurtado07 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

--Sweiner02 (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Mechanism missing
 * Nice, clear abstract.
 * Good job linking in most sections, although some sections are still unlinked.
 * Read through and see where you can do some editing for clarity and smoothness. There are some odd and awkward phrasing bits (probably from paraphrasing).
 * Cite consistently. Some sections are well-cited, some are completely uncited.
 * Recent Research: Summarize the important findings simply. Don't isolate and detail entire papers.
 * While most of the recent research is case studies, and that's fine, there are a few actual research studies out there. Make sure to include them.