User talk:Stephbender/sandbox

Himani's peer review
Nice start to the Pumice article- I definitely feel like you are going in the right direction. The introduction which you have started drafting leads well into the article, with some scientific background and potential hazardous impact. The structure described makes sense, flowing from introduction to properties to volcanic occurrence (which may fall under the Formation section) to applications. Another section you may consider adding in is the history of discovery (when first discovered and named, how people may have previously used the rock). The discussed changes suggest that the article will be balanced, though it will be especially important to discuss the applications, as it currently very limited, with only 1-2 sentences for each type of usage. The article contributions made in the sandbox are relatively neutral. That being said, it is worth noting that under the Natural Sources section the largest producers that are listed are not those that are explained in greater detail in the subheadings (leading to more bias towards Russia and U.S.). If that is something you feel you want to carry over into the Volcanic Occurrence section, make sure to keep it balanced. Your sources are on the right track yet some of your sentences, such as the second paragraph in the introduction explaining the formation process, lacks references. Others, such as [2] could use more information to properly cite as a source. I look forward to reading it later! HD1019 (talk) 00:13, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Steph's Response
Thank you for your input. I do plan on elaborating on each section, especially applications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephbender (talk • contribs) 17:50, 8 March 2019 (UTC)