User talk:Tenzinsonam995/sandbox

TA Feedback
4/3 Assignment - Looks like you got the training done but didn't put notes in your sandbox on either article (-2 points) Try to make sure you get all the content for the assignments done next time for practice! EKM2018 (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC) 4/7 Assignment - Nice job getting the training done and adding content/citation to a page! Don't forget about extra credit opportunities! EKM2018 (talk) 18:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC) 4/10 Assignment - Nice job picking a topic and writing about it in your sandbox. Do you have any ideas on sources? Keep that in mind! EKM2018 (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2018 (UTC) 4/21 Assignment - You have a list of sources, but you need to properly cite them and try to figure out how they help you define an outline for your article/fill in what your article needs. It should be a positive feedback - an outline will show you what sources you need, but your sources will also show you what potential new sections you can add. Is there any way we can try to work in some marine geology into this article? I think we can if we are creative - perhaps within examples of beds, their depositional environments, etc. I highly encourage you to try to do this! Also using non-journal articles and posting how you will use these sources to improve the page on the topics' talk page could encourage feedback. EKM2018 (talk) 06:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC) 4/28 Assignment - Nice start to expanding. However look back at the assignment for an example of a good "lead" section for an introduction. You don't want to do too many lists, instead you want to try to do more complete paragraphs that have embedded references and links to other pages. I think there are a lot of ways you can take this topic - and even though it should focus on the general definition we know that wikipedia pages are great because they provide a stepping off point for learning more. Ie. for bed thickness, do you have any information on why those are the parameters used? Thats an example of how you can expand! Where does a bed fit in with other terms, say a unit or a formation or laminae? You could give examples for all of these along with their depositional environment? Perhaps we can do some brainstorming with Will to make sure this stays relevant for our class! EKM2018 (talk) 06:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC) 5/3 Presentation Feedback - I liked your ideas for figures to recreate. They are simple and I think can be done well. Geologic principles are good too, talking about suing beds to determine time and evolution of an area as well as a way you can give examples of beds and structures (try to focus on marine examples or at least provide a few if you can to link to class! Do marine fossils play a role?) Check your source that says date 1671! Include the history of bed concepts. I think this could be a highly worthy article! EKM2018 (talk) 20:47, 3 May 2018 (UTC) 5/5 Assignment - First Draft Notes - Good start but I think you could add a lot to this first draft for us to edit from your presentation and the comments we gave following your presentation! You talked about a lot more examples of principles in your presentation! Be sure to include these! Use your presentation as a reference for expanding your outline and creating this first draft! Let me know if you need more help getting comments into something you can add to your page! Your writing is clear and concise - keep that up! EKM2018 (talk) 06:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC) 5/26 Assignment - Second Draft Notes - Since you took your page live (which is great!) I'm giving you your edits here only. Overall good length. Well cited with links to other pages and nice concise, clear writing. Very good figures! I do have a couple comments that I am going to break up by section. Overall I think you are VERY close to being done in my opinion, just do these things to clean it up! Great work on getting this done! Intro - Are beds ALWAYS sedimentary? I would maybe change that to "commonly sedimentary rocks.." especially because you talk about bedding in quarries not being sedimentary I think? When you talk about strata, I'd change the wording to be "deposited bed after bed over a long..." The last sentence of the first paragraph should be the second sentence instead to fix the flow. Bed Thickness - I would change your wording to be "one of the smallest" since you actually define the smallest bed as a lamina. Can you give an example of a thickness-age relationship? Preferably a marine sedimentary rock (hint hint: https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/education/upload/Rock%20information%20cards%20TT_small.pdf) EKM2018 (talk) 18:48, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Sources Feedback
Building on Emma's comments I am not sure that you need to do more than tweak the current introductory lead section of the existing page since that should focus on the definition. So your challenge is to come up with a series of sections to follow. From what you have so far, I am not sure what those sections would be other than Bed Thickness. May be an expanded section on types of bedding that points to the points to the excellent existing pages on cross beds and graded beds. Cycle bedding? Depositional environments? Since you have Lyell's 1830 text book may be a section on the historical importance of interpreting sedimentary beds. William Wilcock (talk) 16:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Seiji34 Peer Review 5/19/2018
I tend to agree with EKM2018 and William; the lead for the article is fairly well developed (though you could probably go back through it and rearrange a few things for better flow), the later sections just feel like they could use a bit more. Perhaps an introductory bit in the Bed Thickness section discussing factors that affect bed thickness (deposition rate and nearby sediment sources, time between changes, etc.) or, if you can find them, common patterns of bed deposition such as annual cycles. The Geologic Principles section could probably be expanded with a short description or example of how they can be used to reconstruct the history of a region. There could also probably be a section on bed structures to follow up on parallel beds, cross beds, and graded beds and common mechanisms which cause them, since they're mentioned in the lead but aren't expanded upon elsewhere in the article.

In the lead, there are a few sentences which don't really seem to fit where they are, making them sound stilted or truncated. For instance, near the end of the first paragraph, a sentence describing the law of superposition segues abruptly into "The structure of a bed is determined by its bedding plane," and then to how to differentiate beds. It might help to replicate a mini-outline for the lead just to make sure everything fits together; based on the structure of the rest of the article, I would probably have a Definition segment followed by Structure and how to differentiate different beds, then add on the Geologic Principles at the end. The Definition segment can probably absorb quite a few of your sentences so you have more room to play around with connecting other topics; I would probably leave the first three sentences where they are, bring the last sentence of the first paragraph and at least the first part of the last sentence of the lead up to join them, and probably add on the first sentence of the second paragraph to cover all the bases. That should leave you with all of the more specific facts to put together the other, shorter segments to introduce the actual sections in your article.

--Seiji34 (talk) 18:27, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Reply
Thank you for your time! I have changed the intro around so that it would correlate better with how I am presenting the information. I have also added lead in sentences to my other segments, but I am confused on what you mean by definition segments since my segments basically state the definition of each principle. Tenzinsonam995 (talk) 04:53, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Reply 2
Sorry, I should have been clearer. I'm making a distinction between the big things with their own headers (like Introduction, Bed Thickness, etc), which I try to call Sections, and individual paragraphs or groups of sentences within those Sections, which I try to call Segments. My later suggestions mostly amounted to rearranging individual sentences within your Introduction Section into discrete Segments summarizing different subtopics from your article, like its own mini-article except without the headings. In my hypothetical rearranged Introduction Section, the first few sentences would fully define what beds are in a Definition Segment, followed by some sentences about the structures of beds that make a Structures Segment, etc, etc. Your article looks much better now, so a lot of that feedback has been resolved quite nicely. I would still recommend rearranging the last few sentences of the first paragraph of the Introduction Section a little. Particularly, "The structure of a bed is determined by its bedding plane" seems out of place and should probably be put somewhere in the second paragraph, since that paragraph is the one that deals with all of the structure. Good job otherwise!

-- Seiji34 (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Instructor Review (5/21)
I think you have the basis for a nice page and I like your figures. Here are my suggestions


 * Introduction. As per Wikipedia conventions this should not have a heading when it gets moved into the Bed(geology) page.


 * Bed Thickness. Add a sentence before the list "The terminology for describing bed thickness is as follows:"


 * Engineering consideration
 * Capitalize first letter of Considerations in title
 * This is one sentence and has not citations. It would be good to find a source and expand this by a couple of sentences.


 * Geological Principles - This needs an introductory sentence which can cite the source for all of these.


 * References - These need to be cleaned up since 1-4 have red fields missing and 5 is incomplete (no volume or year for the geology. Are you using the citation tool in visual editing? - this normally does a good job.


 * Expansion - As per my previous comments, I think sections on Bed types (pulling in part of the introduction) and history of development would be useful.


 * Ordering - Are your sections in the correct order?


 * Figures - These are great. Do you plan to keep the ones that are already in the article?

William Wilcock (talk) 16:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Instructor Review 5/31
This is looking great.

I went in and made a few minor edits to the opening paragraph in the Mainspace to improve clarity

I removed the stub designation

Your references need fixing. 6 and 8 are the same and I am not sure how these are related to 2. 5 is a journal article and does not have volume and pages. Also below your reference list is an extra reference (5 repeated now with volume, issue and pages). Can you add the edition, publisher and their location for books. Compare your reference list to other articles (e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-bedding). The visual editor citation tool should be doing most of this stuff for you automatically

Otherwise this is done

William Wilcock (talk) 21:21, 31 May 2018 (UTC)