User talk:Bradvost/sandbox
This looks good - I have nothing to add beyond the excellent reviewer comments. Dr. Miller--Amille75 (talk) 04:07, 7 December 2015 (UTC)Amille75
Hi Brad! Great job on your contribution. I have listed some comments below relating to your article:
(1) You detailed how Indigofera is morphologically distinct from many other genuses very well.
(2) You used a good variety of sources in writing your paper.
(3) I enjoyed reading about the experiment at the very end of your contribution, where you mention how resilient Indigofera is to selective pressures such as water loss.
(4) Refer to the second sentence from the beginning of your contribution: "Specifically, it has showed to have diverse variety among species and unique characteristics." Perhaps try to rephrase this sentence so that it flows better. A suggestion I would make is replacing "showed" with "shown".
(5) Something that would enhance your paper would be to include information about the evolutionary history of the Indigofera genus if possible.
- General Comments from Amir
- -Brad, fantastic work
- - You had a cohesive wiki page that is both interesting and applicable
- - In terms of content and style, all looks well
- Grammar Comments from Amir
- - In terms of grammar, there are just a few things to improve.
- - In this sentence: "The pericarp can be categorized as type I, type II, and type III with type I having the thinnest pericarp and fewest layers of schlerenchymatous layers, and type III having the thickest pericarp and most layers of schlerenchymatous layers" you do not need the comma between "layers and "and".
- - Make sure that you maintain a constant tense through your paper as well, just by reading over your entry several times should fix this.
- Reference Comments from Amir
- - good sources, I am glad you found good resources
- - In your first reference, there is an extra ") that can be removed.
- - Also, the volumes numbers of the articles do not need to be bolded.
- - Great job overall
Zakharya (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)Amir
Brad, this is great work. You've done a great job of explaining how distinct features inherent to members of this genus allows it to be cultivated into crops of prime quality. You've also organized your information to begin with an introductory statement followed by an elegant thesis, and then you followed with succeeding paragraphs that support the claim that you're making about your genus. This makes your contribution a very easy and informative read , thus allowing people to enjoy it or possibly become inspired to do research on the genus in the future.
There are some minor changes in grammar that you can make in order to improve your article. Following up on the comments made by the first reviewer of the talk page, I would suggest this rephrase of the 2nd sentence of your first paragraph: "Specifically, there has been shown to be a diverse variety among species in its unique characteristics." This just helps the reader to know that the diversity you are speaking of is among the characteristics of the members of the genus, and not the species themselves. Otherwise, there isn't anything else that hasn't been addressed by other reviewers.
Your references are sound, they have been cited in the proper locations, and they are written with all of the required information (year, journal name, volume, issue, etc.). Fantastic job, and good luck with the rest of the semester!
Asehizad (talk) 18:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)asehizad