User talk:ZackNU

In class
We're learning how to comment on talk pages in class. Hopefully I did this right.

Branngu (talk) 16:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, ZackNU, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:44, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Major Points

 * The article is showing great progress. The restructuring of the first sentence improved its clarity. More headings and content have been added. The headings resemble an outline of what the author intends on developing.
 * The Psychology box adds a good visual source and indicates topics that relate to the article.
 * The content box gives the article a more structured and organized image.
 * I would recommend that the definitions in the overview are either your own definitions, based on your understanding, or that they are supported by more scientifically renowned articles. For now, what you have is a good placeholder. My only concern is that it diverts from Wikipedia’s expectations in terms of sources and quotations.
 * Great job adding external links and see also, you can also add the nutrition psychology link to the Fad Diet article so that you give your article more exposure.

Minor Points

 * I agree with the headings you have chosen and think that once you develop each section the article will head in the right direction.
 * Once the sections have been expanded on, reread the first sentence of each section and see if it’s necessary. You will probably explain the topics within the sections and will not need the introducing sentences.
 * You mentioned that you are considering adding pictures. I would look for diagrams or flowcharts that explain nutrition psychology theories.

I’m already seeing improvement from the original article! Great progress ☺ Karmastaji (talk) 21:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review 2
Hi Zack! Here are some additional revision points based on the changes you have made since the first peer review:
 * I see that you have added content to the Origins and Development and Objectives sections. I think that you brought up valuable aspects such as marketing, obesity, and food technology. It would be interesting if you expanded on each of these examples and discussed how they show Nutrition Psychology. I would do this by creating subheadings with a few sentences describing each one.
 * You also mentioned how nutrition psychology shows the impact of outside stimuli. This seems like an abstract remark that can be fixed by giving more specific examples and some scientific support.
 * In terms of sources, I'm basing most of my article on literature reviews. They give a good summary of how the field is developing and can provide you with reliable research results.
 * You seem to be expanding on the See Also section, I think that you will have even more links once you mention food marketing and other examples in depth.
 * I am not sure how relevant nutrition psychology is to social psychology, but it might be helpful to look into the field and see society's impact on people with eating disabilities.

Great work! Looking forward to reading your final article! Karmastaji (talk) 01:27, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Context Memo
I enjoyed researching about and working on the topic of Nutrition psychology for Wikipedia! I found that while it is easy to see its need and potential influence on society, the field is still developing and changing today. I think that my article provides a good basis for even further expansion in the future, by laying the groundwork on the subject in a few areas of focus. I still plan to work on the article by linking other pages to it and hopefully finding graphics that will be applicable. I think that it fits in well with other articles that are related by providing a take that isn't already there. Nutrition and dieting are covered by Wikipedia, but the psychological pieces to them are hardly discussed. My hope was to contribute something that is new and easy for others to work on and I think that I did that.

Here is a link to my article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutrition_psychology

ZackNU (talk) 03:58, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Response Letter
I want to thank Ana and Noor for their ideas and suggestions! I enjoyed reading them and tried to take everything into account before working on my article.

I tried to expand on the effects of marketing and outside stimuli on the choices that people make and I talked quite a bit about how obesity plays a big role in what nutrition psychology studies. I also looked at several literature reviews and ended up using a few as my primary sources for the major parts of my article. This was something that I didn't do originally, so to get that nudge in the right direction was very helpful.

I added several subheadings in an effort to be more organized and express the material in the best way possible.

I also looked into research on eating disorders and while I didn't see the topic as a perfect fit for my article, it is something that I will continue to consider as I work on the page in the future.

Thank you again to my peer reviewers, I hope that the latest version of the article looks good!

ZackNU (talk) 04:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Article rating
Yes, by all means re-rate the article. All you need to do is edit the template on the talk page - change Stub to Start or C class (depending on how complete you think the article is). As for incoming links - yes, definitely - add them where they seem relevant. And really nice job expanding the article. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:13, 20 April 2016 (UTC)