Excellent. The reviewers pointed out some areas for improvement and I agree. Please revise accordingly. Great work. --Amille75 (talk) 06:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
General Comments:
--I think that you did a fine job explaining this plant. I really enjoyed the way you organized your post. It really looks like a real Wikipedia article --You included important/interesting information about life cycle and living conditions, but I would like to see a little bit more on the usefulness of this particular crop. I know this may be hard.
Grammar:
-- I did not see any grammatical mistakes -- All scientific names appear to be in order
References:
-- You have 5 references -- They are from scientific journals -- I do not think you need quotations around the titles and the date accessed I don't think is too important.
Overall: I think you did a really great job! Jorf5 (talk) 19:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Steve! I really enjoyed reading your article and I think that you did a fantastic job!
- General comments
- I think that you did a great job writing your article and the message was clear in each of the sections that you wrote.
- I really like how organized your article was and I felt like you gave a lot of interesting information about Elymus hystrix.
- Your article was very well written and everything you wrote made sense to me!
- I did not have any questions.
- Grammar
- Your grammar was great throughout the article. The only suggestions I have are in the second sentence of the section “Range and Growing Conditions”, I would change inhabitants to inhabits. In the very last sentence of the section entitled “Classification Debate”, I would add a comma between species and and.
- All of the scientific names were written correctly.
- References
- There were five distinct references
- They all appeared to be from scientific journals
- All of your references look great! I was reviewing the sample citation that Dr. Miller gave us and my only suggestions for your citations are for the first one, I would italicize Elymus Hystrix and Poaceae: Triticeae. For this format, I do not believe that the names of the articles need to be in quotations and I think you only have to capitalize the first letter of the first word in the article. For the second citation, you do not need to write out the author’s full first name; you can just use their first initial. Lastly, I think for this format the year should go after the authors’ names.
Bhagat Peer Review:
General Comments:
I thought the article managed to convey a lot of information and was very organized about it.
I do think that the article mostly described the plant itself and didn't focus much on how it could be used as a crop. (I think we were supposed to mostly focus on the nutritional value). You did talk about this at the very end, but I think she would want that section to have the most information.
Grammar:
I could not find any grammar mistakes, but I would suggest starting some of your sentences a little bit differently. A lot of them start with your species name.
The scientific names seemed to be correct
References:
There were more than 5 distinct references
All the references were from journal articles
They all seem to be correct, but I don't think you need to write the date accessed at the end of the reference