User talk:Jamesbond35/sandbox
Feedback[edit]
Nice work expanding the kisspeptin article. I have some suggestions as to how your draft could be improved
- Most importantly: be very careful when you copy your additions back into the original article. Since you copied the text on the page rather than the underlying wikicode, you need to make sure that you don't add it back (otherwise the formatting might be broken and the references lost).
- The article needs wikilinks. I added a few more. Wikilinks are valuable to readers, since they allow them to learn more about the topics discussed in an article. For example, most people won't know what some term means, they can click through and find out more. A lot of the people who read this article aren't going to know much about the topic. Adding links like these help integrate your article into the rest of Wikipedia, making it more useful to readers.
- Parts of the article are written in a very detailed, technical style. Articles should be accessible to readers whose background in biology is pretty basic - maybe high school or introductory undergraduate readers. That doesn't mean you have to dumb everything down, but you should try to explain things, and think about what the average reader might gain from this.
- You used "cite web" instead of "cite journal" for your reference templates. You should switch your references to "cite journal" when you're citing journals. Also note that PubMed is only an index, not the actual publisher. I also noticed that some of your links go through your school's proxy server. Any link with a format anything like http://0-search.proquest.com.libus.csd.mu.edu/docview/223161384?accountid=100 won't be accessible to anyone who isn't using your school's proxy servers to log in. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:00, 27 March 2015 (UTC)