Jump to content

User talk:Pearofapples/sandbox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Kkher (talk | contribs) at 04:49, 23 November 2020 (KH peer review: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Hello, my name is Jonathan. Welcome to endocrinology. AnonymousUsernam33 (talk) 09:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leave peer review feedback here

[edit]

This is where the peer review feedback for Pearofapples' sandbox draft content should be posted. Be sure to sign your post and complete the Canvas quiz to receive credit for your work. UWM.AP.Endo (talk) 03:39, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shrinwanti Ghosh Review of This Article

[edit]

Is the content written in a neutral, unbiased tone? Yes, it is unbiased.

Do the citations follow the MEDRS (Links to an external site.) (medicine, reliable sources) guidelines? Yes.

Are the citations formatted correctly? Yes, two citations are formatted properly.

Does it make sense to add this new content to the proposed article? The anti-inflammatory effects are not mentioned in the main article, so I think this current sandbox content makes sense to add to the proposed article.

Are there any other areas of the main article that your classmate could contribute to? If the author would have mentioned the relationship between Growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) and gene expression of NF-kB, TNF-α, and IL-6; then it would have been more relevant.

Shrinwanti Ghosh (talk) 02:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KH peer review

[edit]

Is the content written in a neutral, unbiased tone? The content is written in a neutral, unbiased tone.

Do the citations follow the MEDRS (Links to an external site.) (medicine, reliable sources) guidelines? The citations follow the guidelines using reliable sources and does not provide medical advice.

Are the citations formatted correctly? Citations formatted correctly.

Visit the main article that your classmate is contributing their new content to.

Does it make sense to add this new content to the proposed article? Statement seems redundant. Writer can elaborate more to contribute to page. Also, unsure of where writer content would be added to.

Are there any other areas of the main article that your classmate could contribute to? Add info “other functions” and explain content because writer provided information on anti-inflammatory properties. This is outside the usual function of gnrh and should be explained.

Kkher (talk) 04:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]