• Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything is relevant to the topic of plant nutrition while some subgroups either have to much detail or not enough information. • Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? All of the sources are neutral most of them come from books about plant nutrition such as the Journal of Plant Nutrition and the Principles of Plant Nutrition. • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The viewpoints for boron is over represented compared to the other micronutrients. • Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? All of the citations that I checked did work properly. But the section on boron has no citations even though there is a lot of detail.
Start a discussion about improving the User:Ccannon1007/sandbox page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "User:Ccannon1007/sandbox" page.
