User talk:Courseaccount333

Welcome!
Hello, Courseaccount333, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:52, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:RespiratoryFailureTypes.png
Thanks for uploading File:RespiratoryFailureTypes.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:30, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Peer Review for Respiratory Failure
The text is understandable to the public audience with strong readability, structure, and grammar.

Lead: The lead section is clear, succinct, and a good introduction to the article.

Cause: Cause section is straightforward with a nice graphic included.

Types: Types section is excellent with thorough explanation, comprehensive coverage, and exceptional charts included. Detailed yet understandable medical content within this section.

Physical Exam Findings: Short but with appropriate content.

Diagnosis/Treatment: Excellent writing and content in both of these sections

Overall, fantastic work on the article. Although a short article, it provides a well rounded and deep discussion of respiratory failure with sufficient medical content. The article is also well written with a great structure, neutral coverage, easy readability, and excellent use of charts/images.

Resources: High quality resources with working links.

Suggestions: No signs and symptoms or prognosis sections as indicated in original plan. Cause section and physical exam findings section can be bolstered a bit for equal representation of topics. PBP7 (talk) 18:24, 15 November 2023 (UTC)