User talk:Rmccann15/sandbox

1.	First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? The article as a whole is great! I like that you also already have a gallery, unless that was already included.. but it's still good! Your description is on point! You're introduction is also very good. Etymology was a good header, may have to take that for my own article. 2.	What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement? Maybe put information under the taxonomy area. Maybe things that distinguish it from close relatives. This would just be a little more information! I also do not see the taxonomy box. Also you could probably expand the uses, I'm assuming there are more uses. Just curious. 3.	What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Add a taxobox. Is there one in the orignial article? I just don't see it in the sandbox. If so, mainly just expand on uses and taxonomy. 4.	Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! No not really, I would love to know how you did the references. Can't get mine to look like that! Also, I will probably add an etymology header into mine. 5.	Copy and paste the article including references into Word and determine the number of words in the article, do they meet the criteria (at least 1200 words). Good on word count! Cewilson15 (talk) 16:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)