User talk:Longnat/sandbox

I added a title to the article. Then, I deleted" medically significant" since the use of "signicant" doesn't sound neutral. I also hyperlinked some terms that you mention such as "half-life", "decay energy", and "fission" to provide clarity. In the "Production" passage, I changed "Strontium" to "Strontium-90". I believe you meant to keep it as Strontium-90, but I'm not entirely sure. If you did mean to say "Strontium", I'd recommend hyperlinking it.

Angie's peer edit

 * There is a good title that is simple/short
 * The first sentence is direct and tells what yttrium is and it's purpose.
 * I don't see a lead that sums up the whole article.
 * The article is clear to non-experts adding in the hyberlinks to certain words was a great thing to add!
 * The formatting throughout the article is consistent and the grammar is good.
 * There isn't any sentences containing first or second person or bias.
 * All 5 sources are used and are reliable.

Angelamikel (talk) 02:50, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Pierce's revision

 * there is a title
 * all five sources are added
 * There is a perfect introduction sentence
 * The summary has every point in his article
 * All the content is in the body
 * Organization is great
 * the content has all relevant parts
 * the balance of the article does not favor one side
 * The tone is neutral and appropriate
 * The images added show give the article a good picture of his subject
 * The citations and sources are correct
 * the article seems to be complete
 * All the new sections and gaps are filled in and in a great re-organization format
 * The coverage and article body are set correctly

Overall, this article is a great example of a wikipedia article. Good job.