User talk:Sgorukan/sandbox

I agree with reviewers below - a very strong start here with great suggestions below. Please revise accordingly and let me know if you have any questions. Great work! --Amille75 (talk) 05:49, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello njain9 what's up

I really liked how your article had a distinct thesis and argument - it made it much easier to follow because I knew what point you were trying to make overall. It was very well articulated and I couldn't find any grammar issues in the article. The main issue was that I could not quite follow a lot of the information because it was very complex. There were several parts where I was unable to follow the information because it was so detailed and scientifically in depth, and it almost took away from the actual information trying to be conveyed. I would either try to rephrase it in simpler terms, or even tag the more complex information to other wikipedia pages that would be able to explain that stuff in more details. Some things I was confused on were the thermal and hydro time models, Molybdenum, and silicon dioxide use. If you could find a way to clarify these things further, I think it would really strengthen your article. Finally, two of the references (3 and 5) were cited incorrectly. Overall, you provided good, cohesive information about your topic that gave great insight into its use as a perennial food crop. I would just try to use simpler terms that will make the article easier to understand and follow. Mmurph95 (talk) 18:18, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

1.	General Comments

 * Overall, I think the author did a great job. It is well researched and contributes a wealth of information.
 * I think the contribution could benefit from more generalizations, and less on specific numbers and data. I think this might make it feel more like a general encyclopedic article that provides an overview of the genus, and less like a research paper that carried out distinct experiments to address a specific question.

2.	Grammar

 * I saw no spelling errors and all scientific names are written correctly.
 * Changes to the sentence: “The ideal thermal ranges of wheatgrass are 10-30° Celsius…”
 * Remove “the temperature of” so that it is more direct “At 20-25° Celsius”
 * Eliminate passive voice: “the germination reduced uniformity” instead of “had reduced uniformity"
 * Incorrect use of “affects”; because Agopyron is a genus and refers to all plants within the genus, it is not necessary to reference it in the plural: “Light and Nitrogen had effects on seed and rhizome production in Agopyron”
 * Use full word (nitrogen) instead of abbreviations (nitro): “depending on the levels of light and nitrogen available…”
 * Change “helped with semi-solid or liquid variants” to “aided by semi-solid or liquid variants”

3.	References
--96.35.145.169 (talk) 23:30, 30 November 2015 (UTC)jesguerr
 * Yes, there are five references and all are from scientific journals.
 * You don’t need periods after the authors first and middle initials, for example: “Schellenberg, MP, Billgetu B, Wei Y (2013)
 * You only need the year, not the full date, that the article was published in parentheses after the last author’s last name.
 * You don’t need quotation marks around the article’s title.
 * You don’t need to include the date of retrieval.
 * Reference 5 is missing the names of the authors.

General Comments: Grammar:
 * The main point of the article seems to identify specific factors, which influence seed growth of the Agropyron species. These factors include thermal and hydro time models, the introduction of molybdenum, the application of silicon dioxide, as well as exposure to light and nitrogen.
 * Overall I think your post is very informative about factors that affect the seed growth of Agropyron. I liked the fact that your post focused on a singular topic. This post is headed in the right direction, and it leaves room for discussion about other features of the Agropyron species.
 * The second paragraph is slightly confusing. It sounds well researched, and contains some vital information. However, I would consider introducing what thermal and hydro time models mean, as a reader I do not know what this means, so it makes the rest of the paragraph a little hard to follow
 * Other than rewording the second paragraph, there were not any spelling errors
 * On several occasions you use a passive voice such as "was also seen to improve seed growth in Agropyron" and "had reduced uniformity". Look to eliminate those from your article in the final draft.

Citations:
 * You have 5 references from scientific journals, good job!
 * Don't need periods after author's first and middle names
 * Don't need quotations around article title
 * Add author(s) to your 5th citation