User talk:Kmblocker 14/sandbox

I realize that this will not be published to wikipedia. Nonetheless, you should stick to the wikipedia guidelines.

One of those is "neutral point of view." That means avoiding evaluative comments and sticking to recording facts.

As currently presented (8:54 am, Sunday morning) there is a large section of text that is obviously a "cut and paste" from a journal article. That 1) is not appropriate in terms of wikipedia style and 2) should be paraphrased and considerably condensed and 3) should be appropriately cited.

The citation format needs to be improved and consistent with wikipedia style.Mringaterutgers (talk) 13:56, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

The citation format still needs to be fixed. The text needs to be carefully edited for typos and grammatical errors. The comments by the anonymous viewer (above) should also be heeded.Mringaterutgers (talk) 18:53, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


 * There are improvements since I last reviewed this, but the discussion of the specific studies should be much more of a summary and less of a detailed recapitulation of methods and statistical findings. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia entry. Your imaginary reader can go to the articles cited for detail.Mringaterutgers (talk) 21:44, 8 December 2013 (UTC)