User talk:Mamilln1/sandbox

Hi! You are making good progress with ideas for expanding the content on the pollen tubes. Keep working at that to make sure that you can find ten sources and contribute substantially to the scientific content. There are a good number of papers that have been published on how the tube grows and communicates with the tissue of the style. Lethornton (talk) 22:29, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Great work so far. I like that you added pictures. The last section is from the text book. It would be better to add some information from recent papers on evolution or examples of specific plants. Make sure that you are covering at least ten primary articles to meet the assignment requirements. Keep fleshing out what you want to say and add links to other Wikipedia articles that are related. Lethornton (talk) 22:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

'''Peer Review ''' To start this process I went section by section and made any notes that I thought were important.

Pollen tube mechanism

You should add the word “as” to the sentence “Plants have separate structures such as microsporocytes…”. Other than that miniscule error, I thought this lead section was very informative about what pollen tubes are and how they make sexual reproduction in plants possible. It was very clear that evolutionarily, sperm became immotile. I did not think this went too in depth in to the topic; it was the perfect introduction for your discussion.

Initiation

This section flowed very nicely. Everything was understandable, and I was interested in the growth rate of pollen tubes. I thought it was incredible how the pollen tube is still able to grow even under stress from X-rays and gamma rays. You have a line in here about selfing, maybe it would be better to put that in the recognition section? Will you include the photograph from your outline about the mechanisms to prevent selfing? Because I think that would be helpful to readers!

Growth and Guidance

You should add the word “with” to the sentence “Mutant Arabidopsis plant embryos were used with and without…”. Maybe you could include a picture here to help depict the placement of the stigma, style, and ovary? In addition, maybe a photograph to help readers understand the placement of the synergids in the egg cell? Very interesting how crucial the synergids are to the formation of pollen tube growth. The sentence “The signaling is the style…” should read “The signaling in the style…”. The word “form” should be “from” in the sentence “The increase in calcium allowed release of the two sperm cells form the tube…”.

a)	Organization – I thought this article was very well organized. As I mentioned before, I think that you might want to only mention selfing and outcrossing in the regulation section. Before reading your article, I reviewed the actual pollen tube page and its respective talk page. This showed me how much help the page needed, and how organized you were throughout the entire process.

b)	Spelling – There were no major spelling errors throughout. Everything was clean in this respect.

c)	Grammar – There were a few grammatical errors. The corrections I had are included in the sections above so you are able to pinpoint them easier.

d)	Tone – One of the major things I was looking for when reading this article was to see if there was any bias, or if the tone of your article was not informative enough. However, I think you were spot on. The language that you used in this article did not indicate any bias, or personal views. In addition, I think your writing has a great tone and flow, which also helped with the organization of your article.

e)	Content – I was very impressed with the amount of research and information you were able to add to this article. It was readable and understandable, which is sometimes difficult with scientific reading.

If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me! Sam Zdanowicz. Zdanows1 (talk) 16:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sam! Thanks for the feedback, I fixed the errors and used your advice! Mamilln1 (talk) 17:22, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Instructor comments: You have incorporated an impressive amount of information! It seems that you could link some of your terms to other pages in Wikipedia. As you start to merge into the other page, double check that you are not repeating any content or references. Have you asked the expert to see whether the details of your section will fit OK with how things are laid out in other sections? His opinion might be useful. Lethornton (talk) 02:15, 13 April 2018 (UTC)