User talk:Dimitri Lampes/sandbox

Angela's Peer Review
You have good information about the topic, however as a reader I am still not clear as to exactly what you mean. I think you should add some more detail to describe your information in a way that someone who does not know anything about glass-filled polymers can understand. One way that significantly helps the reader to understand your information is to add links into your description in case they are unsure of a specific word or phrase. The reader could then click on the link and be directed to the information they need. Additionally, I think that you should separate the Properties and Experiments into two separate topics. (Amarino789 (talk) 20:20, 2 December 2018 (UTC))

review
Hey Dimitri,

So far so good, I would split that section up and try to expand a bit on both of them. If you can another citation would be awesome, but it looks like the page already has a bunch too so no problem if you cant find another. Some hyperlinks in there would also help alot so that someone can look up those funky words and get a better idea of what you're talking about. But other than that its pretty straight to the point and unbiased, nice job.

Marino20 (talk) 01:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

MECH 2960 Instructor Review
Thanks for all the work you've already put into this! Here are a few additional suggestions:

Overview section:
 * is this going to be immediately after the table of contents?
 * The first sentence about polymers is not necessary level of detail here ... just good enough to link to the polymer article
 * All of this should be combined into one concise sentence: "A polymer is a substance that is composed of units of the same, repeated molecular structure. When small glass beads are introduced to the matrix of the polymer, that substance is known as a glass-filled polymer. The glass beads in a glass-filled polymer are referred to as the filler,"
 * The second half of that sentence about the advantages of the filler should be a new separate sentence and thought.
 * Can probably shorten/combine these sentences "There can be much variation in a glass-filled polymer, such as the type of polymer used, the material that the glass beads are made of, and the size of the glass beads used. Almost any polymer can be made a glass-filled polymer, as long as a glass bead filler is added to it."
 * Overall, think of what your main points are and then restrict your written words to distill those into just the most fundamental/basic thoughts.

Experiments section:
 * I am unclear about the purpose of this section. What is the purpose?
 * It's not enough to list various tests that people have done. There are probably hundreds of articles on glass-filled polymers, and you can only cite a few, so that doesn't give a comprehensive overview. Why are these articles important? Are they important?
 * This is an encyclopedia article, so should operate on a level of generality that applies to many/most glass-filled polymers.

Properties section:
 * The first sentences are: "Glass-filled polymers, as the name suggests, are polymers that are filled with glass, usually in the form of glass beads. A glass-filled polymer is not the same as a glass fiber reinforced polymer, which is a sheet material such as fiberglass." The first one is redundant with your overview section, I recommend you delete. The second is an important point, and the distinction probably belongs in the overview section.
 * There is a section of a wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibre-reinforced_plastic#Glass-fibre-reinforced_polymers on class fiber reinforced polymers. I recommend you link it when you introduce that phrase
 * I recommend you rearrange this sentence to put the "complex viscosity" up front: "Using four parameters, the average maximum packing volume fraction, the flow activation energy, the shear thinning parameter, and an adjustable parameter, the complex viscosity of the glass-filled polymer that is being examined can be determined.[4] " The present way leaves it to the end, which makes me confused up until that point. Because the reader might not know what the complex viscosity is, link to the wikipedia article on it.
 * In general, this section would benefit from some re-organization ... the flow of the properties section isn't clear, and it bounces around between mechanical properties, processing properties, and other properties. Try to organize it in a fashion that leads to greater readability.

I look forward to reading the edited version! UML MECH2960 (talk) 01:44, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

MECH 2960 Instructor Review #2
Thanks for all the additional work you've made on this. I think overall its reading well. My biggest concern is the experiments performed section. This seems very specific to just highlighting two experiments, rather than the more general properties. usually wikipedia articles don't have sections like this, because they're too specific for an encyclopedia. I suggest you consider just keeping the most important take-away on the properties improvement from each article, and then incorporate that into the properties section you've shown.

Your properties section has a great beginning, I like it!

Please upload to live wikipedia once you're ready, hopefully before the final! UML MECH2960 (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2018 (UTC)