User talk:Cjackson1215/sandbox

Overall, the article sounds good. However, I am not able to easily find the information that you have integrated into the article. Did you copy and paste from the original article or is this all of your modifications? I did find the bolded text easy to read, I would suggest to bold or provide subheadings for all your contributions to the article to provide a clear structure for peer-reviewers. I did like how you kept all your points neutral. I would continue adding balanced coverage and choosing reliable sources. Keep up the good work! (Dnbell (talk) 23:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC))

PY Capstone Peer Review

I really enjoyed reading the article. One note I had on the first bolded line was that some of it could be edited for clarity/flow. I changed two of the sentences slightly and merged them so that they sounded a bit less short and choppy in comparison to the others around it. It is a bit difficult to see where you've made edits, but pretty much everything I read in the excerpt provided was very solid and well rounded. I would suggest looking into Tarantism and mass psychogenic illness for more ideas. It is fascinating stuff and may help you with further additions. Megan E Smith (talk) 02:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)