User talk:Jasonkung22/sandbox

Good job. Used normal language, gave statistics to prove the fact. ChristalCao (talk) 03:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Information is wisely used to prove the fact. There are also hyperlink connect to other pages. Koko413 (talk) 23:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Great job, used fact-driven to illustrate main-points, Also,using the pyramid style.Samuelzhao000005 (talk) 15:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)Samuelzhao000005

Great work so far. Something I would consider is using more sources in your first paragraph. I am sure you used an outside source in that section so be sure to cite that work. I would also like to know what exactly the "theory-based approach" is. Consider adding a brief description of its purpose and function. Also, consider specifying the study that was published in 2016. So far so good! Jaredgoz (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

This is very fact driven and the content is very useful. I also like how the content goes from broad to more specific. I think that the data and stats you use at the bottom helps to strengthen the content and helps to back up what you were saying in your other paragraphs. Also, make sure to add the link from your original article. Isabelleshegog (talk) 16:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Isabelle

Great Job! I would use more sources for the first paragraph as you only use one. Try removing "From this, it is reasonable to suppose that" to shorten the sentence. Lorenaramirezl (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorenaramirezl (talk • contribs) 16:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I think you need to add a few citations to the article. Its difficult to tell where each piece of information was taken from.SocksOfDeath (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I think your topic is very interesting and your page is very strong in terms of research! One suggestion I have is maybe adding a few hyperlinks for words that your audience might not understand or more outside sources. Great Job! Fariha34 (talk) 16:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I think you have some really good original ideas in here but make sure you have some facts to back up your thoughts and writing. Is your article just based on chinese obesity? Or obesity in general? Maybe clarify the disparity between US and china if not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wohlina (talk • contribs) 16:20, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Good job! I think the topic that you chose is very interesting, and an important to be discussed in today's world. First, you didn't add the section/subsection your sandbox will go into. Second, you need to work on citations and maybe narrow down some of the research. In your second paragraph, there are too many numbers, which can make the reader very confused. You could use some images into the sandbox too.Rafamatalon1234 (talk) 16:23, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Great job! more sources and use the pyramid thing lol (Jackson Yang)

Good work! I enjoyed your use of statistics. It is clear that your content is well researched. I would suggest adding an image such as a chart/ graph thta would help your readers understand your information more visually. Additionally, adding hyperlinks would help to clarify some of the information you used. Ashleydavidsongwu (talk) 16:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I had no idea there was a rising obesity problem in China! It is very interesting to see how the influence of social media can have on young peoples diets. I do not have anything for you to improve on really, I think you have an excellent sandboxCharlier118 (talk) 16:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Good job! Try to add more sources in the first paragraph. Sydneycurrie5 (talk) 20:33, 7 April 2019 (UTC)