User talk:Joe.Perez/sandbox

Group Project Feedback:

General: 1. Start embedding the URLs for the pages you are editing. That makes it easier for you to get feedback from anyone on your proposed changes because it enables rapid navigation to the relevant page. That will help you as well and make it easy to navigate to talk pages as needed.

2. Because you are not working on these elements as a group, give each other feedback and help on materials.

Specific Sections:

Operculum 1. What do you mean by the "structure and function" of the operculum? Can you expand on that? "Furo muensteri" is that another fish species? No links, means I have to search. 2. Building a phylogeny based on two species...can you explain how you will do this? What program will you use to determine branch lengths and typology? How closely related are these two taxa? What outgroup (sister taxon) will you use? 3. Good job explaining how the development source will be used and its relevance.

Ctenoid scales: 1. Consider the trade-offs of starting a new page. Why not further develop the pages that exist and define Wikipedia page sub-sections that you can link to? 2. You will be well-served to read up on scales in your textbook to start. A good fish biology / Ichthyology textbook will also help tremendously. As with the above, great job explaining both the relevance and context for your proposed references.

Dorsal fin: 1. Would discussing the dorsal fin in the context of the median/unpaired fins be more informative? As above, is it useful to have a single page here with a clear mammalian bias, or is it better to put it in context? May want to ask yourselves, is a dorsal fin in a mammal homologous to the same structure in a fish?Osquaesitor (talk) 18:17, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Draft 1 Feedback
Notes for Joe

Over all, your draft seems complete, concise, and your sources seem to provide neutral information. At this point, I would suggest fleshing out this article more, as this seems like an awfully small amount of information for such an important differentiation of analogous structures. You definitely have me hooked in and following what you’re describing, but I want to know more. Really think on what information is still lacking from this piece. Further, everything seems to be appropriately cited.

Do you have plans for pictures of any of these structures if they are not already included? I ask particularly for the pterygiophores. You spend a significant amount of time discussing these, but I'm having a difficult time visualizing them from the text alone. I would look into that if it is a possibility.

Define what dorsal is, or maybe link to a page that defines dorsal. Make sure you include links to other technical biological language that may not be self-evident for the general public. Do the same for proximal, medial, and distal in the later portions of your paragraph.

I definitely think this is a great start to editing the available information on the dorsal fin!

Notes for Connor

Everything appears to be appropriately cited. The content appears neutral, concise, and informative. Everything is phrased in a way that is logical and makes sense.

If you can, provide links to scientific or biological words that may not be self-explanatory, such as papillae or integument. Normal, every-day people may not know what those are off hand.

I’m definitely on board with you wanting to include a clear picture of a ctenoid scale. It will really tie your description in and provide good visual cues, especially if you label the image with a numbered pin system (if possible).

I like the overall trajectory of your project, and it seems like you have a really good plan to work off of.

Notes for Liz

All of the information appears to be concise and neutral. It is super informative, and I am in complete agreement that there needs to be an image or multiple images included about the operculum and its many regions. Without the image, making a mental map off of the included paragraph itself would be difficult. Further, everything seems to be appropriately cited.

I would suggest moving your definition of what the operculum actually is to the top of your section so that people know what they’re reading about from the beginning. As it currently stands, I wouldn’t know that the operculum was a bone until midway through the paragraph.

Try to link as much of the scientific and anatomical terms as you can to pages where they might be defined (if you are not going to define them yourself). I had a hard time following the information you included because there wasn’t a lot of every-day language being used. Try to make this more approachable for the general public.

Overall, this is a really information-rich paragraph, and I like the trajectory that you have for your project! Newmansr (talk) 03:37, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review 3/24
Joe: I appreciate how you went through the different stages of development in terms of Dorsal Fin growth. In doing so, you shed light on how dorsal fins are derived as well as the integument layers throughout the proximal, medial, and distal portions. You provide two quality sources and your sentence structure is well organized and digestible. Structurally, you give a concise definition then move through the different stages of development (larval-adult) in terms of fin growth. Much like others have suggested, I would perhaps add images of the find during each stage of growth you provide? Overall this looks very well done.

Connor: A thorough and neutral explanation of Ctenoid scales and how they develop. I see one credible source which is great but perhaps a couple more sources would solidify the information at hand? I would also add the composition of ctenoid scales, as in what they look like, shapes, sizes, minerals or elements that form them?

Elizabeth: A figure display like you explained would go a long ways in simplifying what seems like a complex anatomical structure. The overall structure of your piece contains valid and informative sentences but they came across a little choppy while I was reading...maybe too many short and abrupt sentences that can be fused via commas? Maybe it is just me. I also might add the overall function of the operculum as many of us in class may be aware--the general population may not be. Your source looks good as well, maybe work on researching a couple more sources as well to add/solidify information? Beckjt (talk) 00:49, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Comments on Peer Reviews:
-Read these comments carefully and compare them to the feedback posted for you on Sakai on the content of your first draft under Resources and Wikipedia Assignments Feedback. There is a folder there for your team. As you can see, you also had some colleagues give you feedback in your sandbox. You may wish to delete this in order to preserve organizational quality, or just move on to a new section.Osquaesitor (talk) 19:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)