User talk:Wlee74/sandbox

Peer Review (Franklin P. Mall)

Hi, after reading your draft I thought everything looked really well organized, and each section was informative, and very well written. I also liked that you've been citing/referencing most of your factual information as you go. One suggestion I could give would be to lengthen the "Personal Life" section and the Lead Paragraph. As for the "Personal Life" section, it might not be completed yet, but if so you could possibly mention more on Mall's wife/daughters if the information is available online. For example you could elaborate a little more on when exactly Mall met his wife, as well as her age/birth/death, and anything significant about their relationship (if there is anything significant) or their daughters' (names, birthdates). For the Lead Section, you could add a little about Mall's personal life, instead of strictly noting career accomplishments. Other than those minor tweaks, everything looks really good up until the embryology section. Kevin duffy9 (talk) 00:31, 17 March 2017 (UTC)Kevin duffy9

==Peer Review (Franklin P. Mall)

Hello! Good work on your draft! It is extremely thorough and well organized and I thought the sections and subsections flowed really nicely. Perhaps, the addition of pictures of Franklin P. Mall, family, work, etc.. could be added to break up the reading and add another dimension to your article. I also really like how you are effectively hyperlinking related concepts, ideas, people, into your work. Your sources are also credible and diverse with a combination of internet and print sources. Looking forward to seeing what the final draft looks like! Bkim11 (talk) 01:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review (Franklin P. Mall)

After reading over your draft, I think that overall, everything is very organized and easy to read! Well done! The different and numerous sections are good because they are very encompassing of Mall's life and show your ability to coherently and easily iterate his life. You include lots of good references and resources; they are all very credible websites. Each section is very detailed and includes a lot of specific information, such as years and the research -- good job on this! In addition, you discuss a lot about his interactions with other scientists, which is wonderful as this can help understand Mall's interactions and involvement in the scientific field. However, I do have a few suggestions for you in order to improve your article. First off, the introduction is very short. I suggest that you make it longer because the introduction is where reads first get an overview about who Franklin P. Mall is; thus, you want to include more general and significant information about Mall in the introduction. Also, there are no images in the article; you should include images of him and his work as visuals help readers understand the information you are trying to convey better. In addition, I have realized that some of the language you utilize in the article does not seem very encyclopedic but instead has the voice of a typical essay. This is especially seen in the "Early Life" section of the article; I suggest you fix this as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia! In the "Education" section, you made a few assumptions about Mall's choices and decisions; I suggest you do not do that as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should only encompass factual information. The "Personal Life" section is short; perhaps you could expand on his children. If they are famous and have Wikipedia pages as well, link them so the readers can see how Mall's influence still exists in the world today through his children and kin. Lastly, you could also expand the "Legacy" section because this section is extremely important as it conveys how Mall's work benefits society today and how it is still used in the science field. Nevertheless, overall, you are doing a fantastic job with this article! Wendytsai223 (talk) 02:54, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review on Franklin P. Mall

From initial observations, the draft article is well-organized, with the necessary sections clearly delineated in the same fashion as traditional Wikipedia articles. The summary at the beginning of the article gave a concise summary of Franklin P. Mall's life . However, the introduction was a bit too short in my opinion; you could have lead on by giving an overview of what readers expect to read about in the other sections. Each of the sections are extremely detailed, consisting of information about all aspects of Mall's life, indicating that this was a well-researched, well-thought out article. By having the biography and career sections separate, you were allowed to be more diligent in detailing the significant events of Mall's life, giving a more in-depth view into the work he did in anatomy and embryology. Furthermore, I liked how you kept everything in chronological order, keeping the article logical and easy to read. Understanding that this has to be a factual biography of Mall's life, I can see why the section was very terse, but you could have perhaps elaborated more on the impact this special attention Mall's history teacher, Mr. John McCarthy, had on influencing his career in research. In addition, the flow could have been improved by including more transition words or phrases, thereby making the article flow smoother. In the "Personal Life" section, Johns Hopkins was mistakenly written as "John's Hopkins." The formula for calculating embryo age could be formatted better. Under "Legacy," you could described how the groundbreaking work Mall accomplished influenced the research of other scientists later on and how the field of embryology has expanded as a result of his work. Overall, this was a terrific draft with some minor adjustments needed to be made. Keep up the good work! 23penguin (talk) 23:28, 9 April 2017 (UTC)