User talk:Sensified/sandbox

Hi,

First off as a major point I wanted to point out that your references look really good! I have yet to work on my references, but I would use yours as a template. Your links also look really thorough, however for bilateral stimulation I might add an internal link to the page " Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing". It doesn't pertain only to bilateral stimulation information, but I think the extra info may be helpful for your readers as well as add a little more "body" to your paper. Another area that I thought might benefit from a link is where you mention other PTSD therapies and non therapies, I'm being nit picky here, but I think it would connect your paper into the wikipedia network more effectively if you add more links. There were a few spots in your article where you restated things that didn't need to be said again. I noticed this because that's what I'm working on most in my paper right now. for example when you say "Bilateral stimulation is a core element of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy," and then say "Bilateral stimulation is one of the major components in EMDR" it sounds redundant. You also mention that it is controversial three times, and the creator twice. I think that mentioning Francine Shapiro twice is fine, except that on both occasions you mention that she invented it. Overall, I think that you have created a very nice start to what has the potential to be a great wikipedia article! You have definitely added something to wikipedia, congrats!

In regards to tone there were very few instances that I thought it could be improved. One instance is int he introduction where you say " while the treatment originally ..." I think that the sentence works just as well if you just take out the while and start the sentence with "The treatment". While comes off as a qualifying term, and I know that it is hard to avoid but I think your paper would be more scholarly if you could find a substitute for it.