Jump to content

Talk:Computational neurogenetic modeling

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

Sources

[edit]

The majority of the papers published on this topic seem to be from one group, if any could be found from other researchers it would be helpful to add them. It's possible that other groups are pursuing this topic under a different name.

Peer Review-Anshul Das

[edit]

1. Quality of Information: 2

2. Article size: 2

3. Readability: 2

4. Refs: 2

5. Links: 2

6. Responsive to comments: 1 -- Perhaps try and reach out to Wiki editors on your own user talk page or the article's talk page for advice and further editing.

7. Formatting: 2

8. Writing: 2

9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2

10. Outstanding?: 1 -- Your topic is interesting, but maybe try adding some forms of visual stimulation other than text, such as a picture.

Total: 18 out of 20 Anshuldas (talk) 20:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review-Emily Croft

[edit]

1. Quality of Information: 2

2. Article size: 2

3. Readability: 2

4. Refs: 1

Recent refs, but missing pubmed ID on the journal articles. It would also be interesting to see if other researchers are working on similar projects, as most of your refs seem to be from the same group. Section on artificial neural network had no sources cited within it.

5. Links: 2

6. Responsive to comments: 2

7. Formatting: 1

Headings should be in sentence case according to the manual of style

8. Writing: 2

9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2

10. Outstanding?: 1 Presented a lot of information, and would be better with more support from refs and fixing the style. _______________

Total: 17 out of 20


Emily Croft (talk) 20:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

[edit]

1. Quality of Information: 2

2. Article size: 2

3. Readability: 2

4. Refs: 2

5. Links: 2

6. Responsive to comments: 1 - Since no wikipedian has posted as of yet, maybe just add a sentence or two explaining your openness to ideas on this talk page.

7. Formatting: 2

8. Writing: 2 - Always a good idea to re-read

9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2

10. Outstanding?: 2


Total: 19 out of 20

Matthew Czerwonka (talk) 22:16, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]