User talk:Kyliebennett/sandbox

Peer review

I really like what you've added in the rough draft and you have greatly expanded on what is currently in the wikipedia woodchips page.

My main critiques are as follows.

I like the additions you have made to the introductions section but it is just a introduction and it should be pretty basic. For example wood chips having 40-50% the bulk energy density of solid wood is good information and could definitely fit in other sections later in the article such as the fuel section in applications but it seems like too much information for an introduction.

I like that you already have useable pictures.

In the raw materials section you mention that Softwood species tend to be more versatile for use as wood chips as opposed to hardwood species however this is largely dependent on what the wood is to be used for. But you don’t mention what it would depend on. There is possibility to expand on situations where one type is preferable to the other for both types of woodchip.

I was going to point out that in the applications section you mention different types of wood chippers but don’t mention what they are but I see your partner is working on expanding on the types of wood chippers so it's good.

I like all the citations you are adding you are making the page much more credible

Overall great additions to the article!!! It was a smooth read and there were no noticeable errors. You're adding lots of new sources making the article more reliable. Keep it up! Carleton2712 (talk) 06:30, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Comments from Sarah
It looks like the arctile is called woodchips (no space), so I would leave the spelling as is (but make sure it's consistent). — Preceding unsigned comment added by TA ERTH4303 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)