Talk:Toxic leukoencephalopathy/Georgia Tech Intro to Neuroscience

Peer Review from Bennettalterman (talk) 05:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)Bennett Alterman

---

1. Quality of Information: 1
2. Article size: 2
3. Readability: 2
4. Refs: 2
5. Links: 2
6. Responsive to comments: 1
7. Formatting: 1 (Doesn't have class link on Talk page)
8. Writing: 2
9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2
10. Outstanding: 1 (Good for lay-people)

_______________

Total: 16 out of 20

---

1. Quality of Information: 1 (most of the references don't have date) 2. Article size: 2 3. Readability: 2 4. Refs: 2 5. Links: 2 6. Responsive to comments: 7. Formatting: 2 8. Writing: 2 9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2 10. Outstanding?: 1 (the summary is lacking in content and less informative) ______________ Total: 18/20 Adewale3 (talk) 06:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

---

1. Quality of Information:2
2. Article size:2
3. Readability: 2
4. Refs:2
5. Links:2
6. Responsive to comments:2
7. Formatting:2
8. Writing:2
9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page:2
10. Outstanding:1 (if you could give examples of people being treated it could make your article more relatable.)
Total: 19 out of 20
Christopherjbaker1993 (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC)