User talk:Crobertson4/sandbox

For the peer review please address the following questions (as appropriate for the article):

1. First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?

The original article does a good job with providing the basic information regarding ear plugs and then goes in depth to cover a wide variety of topics.I think the amount of depth they went into was impressive. Things like the history of ear plugs is not something I feel would typically be added on an informational page, but it was a nice edition. I think the very specific definition of ear plugs that Courtney added at the beginning is helpful too. Often times when people come to a Wikipedia page I think it to get a brief description of what the page is about and this sentence does that well, along with provide additional links to similar topics.

2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

Although the article had a lot of information it was hard to follow from both a grammatical and organizational standpoint. With the information give I think it would sometimes put in information that was not important just to add it. For example, the basic ear plug section talked about different countries along with a lot of information about NRR that was hard to follow. After that there was a whole section about NRR. I think the Courtney's additions and reorganizations made it more easier to follow. To make it even easier to follow you could group the sections further into things like recreational use and professional/workplace use. This change would help the reader follow the information and help them locate what they are looking for.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? I think that the organization is the most important thing for improvement, as it made the article really hard to understand. After that I would say grammar as that also added to the dysfluency.

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! I found the information really relateable to my article. Since my topic refers to hearing protection a lot of the ear plug information that is talked about in this article is also mentioned in mine or at least referenced if it is not fulled discussed.