User talk:Geneticsnicholson/sandbox

Overall, I thought that you had a really well executed article. It was clear to me that you had put in a lot of time and effort, especially in regards to literature review. You referenced some very interesting studies and gave great summarizations of their findings. It was nice to have scientific evidence that supported your topic. The content of your article was meaningful and you provided it in great depth (Well done on that!) Another strength of your article was the table you embedded at the end. I found it to be such a useful summarization of everything you had talked about. Having it as a conclusion to the article gave the reader a nice way to solidify the information. In regards to suggestions, the only ones I have are more on organization, grammar and the esthetics of the article.

The first thing I think you could do to that will improve the article a lot is by integrating it more into Wikipedia. You talk a lot about terms and techniques within cognitive science that have their own pages, and linking to these is an easy way to further enhance your work. For example, some of the terms that stood out to me that could be linked were lexicon, PET, aphasia, artificial neural network and priming (to name a few).

In light of that, I think it would also be beneficial to not just link to these other pages within your article, but also to briefly summarize them within your content. For example, you linked to “Broca’s area” but never really summarized what it was. Considering an entire section is devoted to it, for a general reader who doesn’t have knowledge of Broca’s area they may get lost in this section within knowing what it is. Something even as simple as “Broca’s area is a region of the brain that is involved in language processing” would help. Images would really enhance this section as well. Perhaps a figure of the brain that shows the location of Broca’s area or some of the other areas mentioned in the study by Moro. Giving some visual context could help with comprehension.

Furthermore, some terms were neither linked nor defined (i.e., anomalies, pseudowords) which could inhibit a reader from understanding your article if they don’t have knowledge of these terms already. I would suggest that you briefly define these as well

Lastly, just as a general tip make sure you re-edit your article for spelling and grammar. Some of your paragraphs are quite lengthy and at times I would lose my place within it and had trouble finding my spot again. An easy way to fix this would be just to break it down into smaller subsections. In addition, some sentences I found to be a little too long as they contained so much information. I would suggest breaking those down into smaller clauses. I did a quick edit of your first introductory paragraph as an example.

All in all, I thought you did a really good job. It was evident that you worked hard on it. I think it would make a great addition to Wikipedia if you so choose to publish it. Great work!

-DMR24

cmccar4's Comments

The first thing I noticed was that you didn't have an introduction to your page. It would be helpful if you had a short introduction summarizing your topic at the top of the page. Then a reader can see clearly whether they are on the page they want to be on or not. You do have a section called Introduction, but it explains what a morpheme is, not what morphological language processing in the brain is.

What is a morpheme: this paragraph was very well worded and easy to understand. It would be helpful if you added in a few links to other wikipedia pages for people who want to learn more on this topic. It might be helpful to have a definition of what morphological processing is. I know you already defined morpheme, but it may be helpful to define both if this is directed toward someone who does not have a prior knowledge in psychology. Need link lexicon to it's Wikipedia page. Need link to Priming (psychology) page on Wikipedia.

Broca's Area: Excellent use of scientific literature. I do think that the level this is written at might be a bit high for the audience you are writing for. Some of these paragraphs get quite complex, although links to other Wikipedia pages would probably help to clarify many of these concepts.I specifically noticed that you need links to pseudowords, semantics, PET, brain areas mentioned, and Aphasia.

Models of Morphological Processing: need some more explanation on what "internal structure" and "orthographic structure" are.

Probabilistic Models of Morphological Processing: Was there any examples that could be given to make this more clear? What kind of language tasks did the model perform well in? What did other models do differently that did not allow them to account for such a wide variety of words?

Morphemes and Prosodic Components in Language Recognition I found myself rereading sentences in this section to understand the specifics of what you were explaining. The sentences are written well, however I think it would be helpful to split the paragraphs up more. Maybe have the definitions of fixed content morphemes and prosodic morphemes outside of the paragraphs altogether so the reader can glance back at them to keep them straight as they read through the section.

Morphemes and Word Recognition: What are semantic derivatives? I think you should also say something about morpheme primes here. Explain what they are so someone could understand this without having to refer back to everything else you have already written.

Morphological Relevance in Second Language Learning: What are inflectional morphemes? What are number morphemes? Need a reference in the first paragraph after discussing "A comprehensive model has been proposed to explain this phenomena". Also need a reference for the last sentence of your first paragraph. The first paragraph is also very long. It could be split up into two. Also the wording in the last sentence of the second paragraph is off.

Second Language Learning and ERP -need a link to ERP. What do these results mean in the context of morphological language processing?

Morphological Mapping in the Brain of Dyslexic Patients: Excellent section! Link to fusiform gyrus would be helpful.

Morphological Processing in the Brain of Patients with Down-Syndrome: Might be helpful to give a clearer explanation of what specific aspects of language someone with SLI would have or whether it could be deficits in all aspects of language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmccar4 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 3 April 2013 (UTC)