User talk:Dorothy Golden/Megakaryoblast

Ganglion Cell Draft Peer Review
This is a great draft with a lot of good information. I can clearly tell that you did a lot of intensive research to improve this article.

The first paragraph was very well improved and you made great use of the link feature.

The second and third paragraphs are great additions and provide important information! I believe that one sentence could be improved by writing, "...varies in phenotype and the structure when viewed with electron microscopy." Without the word "when" the sentence feels like it's missing something. Otherwise, these are great! My other suggestion might be to go more into depth on the megakaryoblast or -cytes role in the bone marrow. This might give the readers a better understanding on the actual physiology of the cell type. It may benefit from mentioning where in the bone marrow megakaryoblasts are found, and afterward how platelets are formed. I'm not sure if this was stated or not, but it could always be useful to lengthen if you felt the desire to.

The development and structure sections really benefited from your edits! You added so much good information and really improved the heart of this article. I think you really hit every point I could think of.

Your sources seem reliable. No additional images were used, but I don't see any problem with this as the ones from the original article are vey useful. Overall, this is a great draft. I really like your wording throughout as it makes everything extremely clear and straight to the point. This is an easy and informative read for any audience.

An.cellkid (talk) 00:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Peer Review!
I think that you did incredible work to this article! All of the links in the first section make it really easy to navigate so that readers can do further research on terms that they may not have a prior understanding of.

One section that I wish you expanded on a bit was the associated disease. Although it is listed and linked which makes it easy to read up on, I personally think that putting some basic information about the disease could have strengthened the section. Since you chose to have it as it's own section, some additional information may be helpful.

In reading your article I did not find any clear spelling/grammar mistakes. The sentence structure was there and everything flowed nicely.

The sources are cited properly so no issues there!

I initially was going to suggest that you add another image however after looking back and seeing that there are two separate images (at first glance I saw them as one big image) I think it may be enough. The images you used are clear and a direct reflection of the topic.

Overall I think that you made fantastic edits to this paper and that it is much stronger now. I can tell that you worked hard!

Fairbanks24 (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)