User talk:Angrymidget2000/sandbox

Peer review

1. First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?

   -You were very thorough in describing the plant. Also, you had really great sources that enhanced the amount of information that you were able to gather. 

2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

   -Try inserting some hyperlinks to unfamiliar words. You have plant of length to the article but some of the definitions throw off what you are trying to say. Hyperlinks will help you organize it a bit more and take out some of the awkward wording.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

   - make sure to incorporate the previous work from the last author into yours somehow. Also, you can even out the information a little by taking some of the description of how the plant differs from other plants and put it into "taxonomy".

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!

    - I could actually try to expand my article by explaining some of the fancy words because I know I didn't make it to 1200 words...

5. Copy and paste the article including references into Word and determine the number of words in the article, do they meet the criteria (at least 1200 words).

   -Yes! You went way past 1200 words, good job :)

ManekiMeeko (talk) 22:05, 9 November 2016 (UTC)