User talk:Invay64/sandbox

I think what you have currently planned (and some that's already written) paints a much bigger picture to the many different designs, industry usages, and components of a bioreactor. I also think you have a done a good job breaking up the many different sections into different parts (as to not confuse the reader and make it easier to search up things). For the industry usage section, I think adding a intro or conclusion might be a good way to sum up the different usages (and maybe how they relate to each other). This section might be one that people may have slightly more knowledge about since its practical and in use so relating to the reader that way might be interesting. Also since you are adding so much information, I think explaining the significance of each of these new sections is a great way to plant the knowledge you have added as important and filling of a knowledge gap. I like that there's not too many subheadings, and that's a good thing since the structure will not be as confusing. This is something I'm probably gonna want to think about as I have way too many subheadings added. Stanleykywu (talk) 22:32, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

1. I think that the outline provided, once in writing, will do a good job of taking a reader into the specifics of a bioreactor after starting them with more general info at the beginning. Also I think the writing you have now does a good job of not being too complex where the reader feel bogged down. 2. I would suggest maybe shortening the sections you have it seems quite long to write about and I think focusing on just a few styles and applications of bioreactors would get the same info across without burdening you with writing about all of them. 3. I'd say adding some images would help also maybe having the specification and history section at the beginning would help. Eggsbendyboy (talk) 22:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)