User talk:Vicktoriea94/sandbox

Hey Torie,

I thought it was great how you actively added your own sections to the page. The content to begin with was fairly scare, so it was good to see you added supplementary information. Right now, the content you included is a good approach and helps add to the understanding of IOR.

I'm sure you are going to add the citations in later, but that is just something I noticed that had not been included yet. I also am wondering if your second source would be considered credible (the lecture). It probably isn't peer reviewed and is possibly a little too informal. Additionally, I have to fix this in my own article, Wikipedia structure includes concisely written sentences and it might help to cut some of yours down and eliminate some extraneous filler content. I agree that it might be worthwhile to combine the two sections and integrate them because it seems they could fit together pretty seamlessly. I was also wondering, are the results from the study you described generally accepted as the neurology of IOR? Maybe it would help to add widely accepted principles for what researchers believe govern this process (if that exists), I could be completely wrong, but it could be something to look into if you are searching for more information to add.

Definitely a good start, good luck the rest of the way, MaxxEvans (talk) 01:59, 23 September 2016 (UTC)