User talk:RebeccaWedley/sandbox

Peer Review
Gold Fingerprinting (Draft)

- Requires source for definition of what gold fingerprinting is

________________________________________________________

Importance

- Link to laser ablation page to allow readers easy access on its information, as well as put in brackets its abbreviation in order to properly use "LA-ICP-MS" throughout the rest of the article

- "Over the past 32 years,"

- You don't necessarily have to say the focus of the article because it will continuously be changed and added to

- Cite Brostoff's work instead of referencing it directly in the article (e.g., A group of gold foil fragments dating back to the ... relationship to one another [source])

Limitations

- Are there any further limitations? The paragraph flows nicely, but the use of "few" indicates 3 limitations.

Methods

- Love the method linking

- "The most used method" could be "The most common method"; "preservation of the samples and it is convenient as ...";

- Because you previously made abbreviations known, you can then use them throughout the section (and any part after they are stated) and don't have to restate them.

- Salting link isn't that helpful; " including gold that has undergone salting can be identified as to its multiple sources" awkward, not sure what is being said/referenced to after "salting"; how does it assist origins of gold artifacts?

Problems

- Possibly include in the limitations section.

_______________________________________________________

Overall, the article is worded well and most issues are from it being a limited rough draft. Aside from these issues, most of the article is concise and un-biased, with good sources being provided.

SailorJupiter4 (talk) 15:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Grammar mistakes will be changed as well as the importance section will be reworded as to not blatantly state the purpose of the article and to cite instead of referencing the examples given. There were no other limitations that are applied to the general use of gold fingerprinting. I like the suggestion under Methods to change most used to most common, makes the article sound more professional. I am not sure about the salting link as well, it was in the original gold fingerprinting article and I am hesitant to remove it but will consider doing so. Thank you for your feedback. RebeccaWedley (talk) 22:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

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 gold finger printing page. I'm really impressed with how much you were able to expand since the original page is so short.

I only have two main critiques which are as follows

1. Under limitations you mention that limitations can be avoided in the right scenario and settings but you don’t mention what the right settings and scenarios are. 2. Under methods you only expand on LA-ICP-MS not any of the other methods. All methods link to other pages so I suggest either focus on the gold finger printing itself maybe talking about how accurate each method is or provide a basic summary of each method instead of only going into one method. A quick summary of each method would be nice so you don’t have to read the other pages to understand how each method works and you could also talk about the accuracy of each method during each method summary.

Overall great additions!!! It read smoothly and there didn't seem to be any noticeable errors. Great work, keep it up! Carleton2712 (talk) 05:58, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * The reason for the lack of explanation on the avoidance of limitations is primarily because I was unsure if that would be applicable in this article or if that is something that should be stated in the actual articles of the various methods. I will however, write an explanation as I see how simply stating that is not enough. I will expand on all methods as not discussing methods and sticking to gold fingerprinting in itself would result in very few additions to the article. Thank you for your feedback.RebeccaWedley (talk) 22:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Student review
Both the importance and limitations seem to flow very well and add substantial information about the subject. The references check out for these two sections. MCarrier18 (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC) The methods section seems to flow well with the references checking out, although limitations would fit better under problems. Great information and sources. MCarrier18 (talk) 13:35, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Other peer reviews suggested the combination of limitations and problems as well. We will be reorganizing the order of the article to accommodate this suggestion. Thank you for your feedback.RebeccaWedley (talk) 22:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review for Gold Fingerprinting
First of all, I would like to say you did a great job on improving the quality of the article. Compared to the original article, a lot of good information of importance, limitations and problems is added from scientific papers.

I think you did a great job at linking some of the subjects like Electron microprobe and Synchrontron micro-XRF to the Wikipedia pages. These can be very difficult terms even for people with a science background, so it will be really helpful for readers of all levels.

Current references are good and seem to be from reliable sources that are recently published. However, in the importance and limitations sections, the citing is not correctly done. I think it is the best to provide a reference to all the sentences, so that readers can know where the information is from and can get an access to the source for further details. Also, the citing for [5] is not showing anything.

Lastly, I know you have stated that this article will focus on the archaeological purpose of the gold fingerprinting. But I think it can be also good to give an example or two of how the gold fingerprinting can be applied for biological and forensic purposes as they are mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkmg192 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Citations will be edited so that they all appear in proper format, this was a slight communication error. As for cite [5] upon checking the link did work, I am unsure as to why it did not work when you attempted to view it but any problems at the moment have been fixed. We will try to include a section on gold fingerprinting use for biological and forensic purposes if more acceptable sources can be acquired. Thank you for your feedback.RebeccaWedley (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Review Response for User:Jessicanajera
The abbreviation of Laser ablation induced coupled plasma mass spectrometry will be added to the first occurrence of the word. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to expand on what elements are found as there are numerous elements that can be traced back in the gold. There is no one identifying element, it is simply matching gold to identical/similar gold. It is not a defining element but the series of elements that provide a definition of the gold; therefore, to say what element is found would be listing almost all minerals on earth which may not be appropriate for the wiki page. Thank you for your feedback.RebeccaWedley (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Sarahs comments on rough draft
The section Importance starts with a discussion of LA-ICPMS. This seems out of place, I would discuss this technique under methods. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TA ERTH4303 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 19 March 2018 (UTC)