User talk:DeathOnArrakis

Hey sorry I put this on your user page not on talk: Peer Review Message:

Good morning! After reading through your assigned article I must say it is an interesting topic but might be difficult due to the extensively reviewed and well written article. Here are the top points from my analysis of the article:

Overall I think that the lead is pretty solid like most of the article, the article is a B grading and is well formed at this point. Overall the Content of the article is solid and all relates well to the topic of Otzi, I would possibly try to find better sourcing on some of the subsections because some links to sources are broken and some dont go to a source that is easily related to the points they are sourced to. Overall I think the tone of the article has been completely neutral thanks to heavy editing an collaboration on the talk page. Overall the intext linking is solid but as mentioned some sourcing links are not as relatable to the topics they are sourced to should be, maybe these can be updated with some research and allow them to really reflect the claims of the article better. The organizational sense seems very solid, I would probably look elsewhere to make the edits My final thoughts on this article is that it will likely be somewhat difficult to work with, it is already very well written, well sourced and the talk page was very involved, I would highly suggest that you look into the sources relatability to the claims they source to and see if you can find better sources relating to the points. I would also see about some of the places of interest being linked within the article as that seemed to be lacking in key points such as the research universities that conducted certain tests, those would be a nice addition, as well as their specific research publications that are talked of would be great to be sourced to

These are copy-pasted from the peer review and a little bit more detail can be found there as well.

I think this is a difficult article for the assignment but I also think the fixing of some of the sourcing will make it a better article for academic uses! GOOD LUCK!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rag138 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome!
Rag138 (talk) 14:34, 17 October 2020 (UTC) Peer Review Message:(I think I accidentally also put it in your user page)

Good morning! After reading through your assigned article I must say it is an interesting topic but might be difficult due to the extensively reviewed and well written article. Here are the top points from my analysis of the article:

Overall I think that the lead is pretty solid like most of the article, the article is a B grading and is well formed at this point. Overall the Content of the article is solid and all relates well to the topic of Otzi, I would possibly try to find better sourcing on some of the subsections because some links to sources are broken and some don't go to a source that is easily related to the points they are sourced to. Overall I think the tone of the article has been completely neutral thanks to heavy editing an collaboration on the talk page. Overall the intext linking is solid but as mentioned some sourcing links are not as relatable to the topics they are sourced to should be, maybe these can be updated with some research and allow them to really reflect the claims of the article better. The organizational sense seems very solid, I would probably look elsewhere to make the edits My final thoughts on this article is that it will likely be somewhat difficult to work with, it is already very well written, well sourced and the talk page was very involved, I would highly suggest that you look into the sources relatability to the claims they source to and see if you can find better sources relating to the points. I would also see about some of the places of interest being linked within the article as that seemed to be lacking in key points such as the research universities that conducted certain tests, those would be a nice addition, as well as their specific research publications that are talked of would be great to be sourced to

These are copy-pasted from the peer review and a little bit more detail can be found there as well.

I think this is a difficult article for the assignment but I also think the fixing of some of the sourcing will make it a better article for academic uses! GOOD LUCK!!!

Hello, DeathOnArrakis, 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) 19:43, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Otzi stomach
Hi! I noticed the information you added to Otzi about the contents of his stomach. It's all good stuff, but I thought I should mention there's already a paragraph under 'Body' about scientific study of his stomach, and the two paragraphs duplicate a lot of the same material. You might want to have a quick look and just merge the two paragraphs to remove the redundancy. Happy wiki-ing! Ganesha811 (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2020 (UTC)