User talk:Twright71/sandbox

Madeleine's Peer Review

The lead sentence is very thorough and left me with a very good understanding of the topic. I think it is the perfect length, however it has two full sentences that could be separated with a period or a semicolon. Also, more links to could be added to phrases such as the carbon cycle and silicate minerals (if possible). Overall, the lead sentence has been greatly improved and summarizes the basis of the article very well!

The original article seems to be lacking greatly in structure, as it only had the introduction and a very short second section. I think that at least two additional sections could be added to more thoroughly evaluate this topic. The way that it is broken down in your sandbox is extremely well organized, with an overview and then a new spin on the topic. These two additional sections will greatly strengthen the article, and I think that adding maybe one or two more sections would finish the wiki page off well. Another area of improvement would be adding a diagram or image to give the audience a nice visual to enhance their understanding.

Currently, the article is unbalanced in that the first section is almost four times the second section. The additional information that you have found in your sandbox will help this issue greatly, and I think that further research on the cycle and its relation to other planets will help balance the article even more. The information in your sandbox is very impressive and well balanced! Everything included in the article and in the sandbox at this time are on topic and will continue to give the reader a better understanding of the carbon-silicate cycle. The article is unbiased and does not try to lead the reader to lean a certain way, good job!

You have created very good, neutral content in your sandbox! The only thing that could be taken to be biased is the first sentence of your second paragraph. The way that it is worded as a question, "the question could be asked..." makes it its seem like the reader doesn't think that it can be a question, but is still willing to discuss it for the audience. With this simple change, I think you will have created some awesome neutral content in your sandbox. Reading over your article and seeing its neutrality has inspired me to look over my own article to make sure I am using neutral sources and presenting the information in an un-biased way, as well!

One thing that is lacking in your sandbox, currently, is citations for individual facts that you present in your paragraphs. It is hard to tell where information from each sentence is coming from when there is not an in-text citation after every few sentences. Once you add in where your got individual facts and knowledge, I think you will really improve the credibility of the article in your sandbox. The articles included in the reference section of your sandbox come from a good variety of sources including journals from two very different time periods. This wide range of sources will help you achieve the unbiased information you need to create an informative wiki article!

Mhardt3 (talk) 07:21, 5 October 2018 (UTC)