User talk:Iles27/sandbox

Finding an article topic - Biomedical Waste

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? - Yes, i'm interested in how institutions such as hopsitals discard their medical waste, and the impact it has on the enviornemt Is it written neutrally? - Yes, It is written nuetrally because it is simply relaying the information and not swaying to any side. Does each claim have a citation? - Each claim does have a citation, and they all appear to be working sources. Are the citations reliable? - Most of the sources appear to be reliable, such as governmental agencies. While a few sources came from questionable websites.

COMMENT: Good topic and preliminary evaluation, but what are the content gaps that you think need to be filled for this page? What are the sources you'll use to dot that? Julianfulton (talk) 04:40, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

COMMENT ON ROUGH DRAFT: I read the section (TREATMENT) of the Biomedical waste article which you wish to expand off of. I think you can provide a sufficient amount of content to this section. By analyzing current methods of decontamination and comparing them with proposed alternatives you can provide additional insight and address content shortcomings.

-Plasma pyrolysis: This method seems effective but in the long term ineffective for widespread application because of how expensive it is. It is worthy to mention but most likely not an effective method for decontamination alone.

-Auto Claving: Already in use, this is worthy to mention especially since you can explain how the other methods are better.

-Chemical Methods: Chemical methods can be cheap, effective, and inexpensive. I would recommend providing some substantive examples to provide additional information and content.

-Microwave Irradiation: Microwave irradiation is an effective way to treat hazardous waste in lieu of Auto Claving. I did some research and it is both inexpensive and effective. Good job picking this out.

Mitigation: I like that you are also viewing this problem from a cooperation and mitigation perspective. This reminds me of our presentation in COMS-4H in which you came up with really good ideas for solutions to the topic we were discussing. Definitely write about these proposed solutions.

-Surveillance: Monitoring is an effective way to determine if progress is being made while also making sure that a situation (such as waste in public) is not getting worse. Explain how this surveillance can be done to address issues with biomedical waste.

-Regular Cleanups: I think it is a good idea to mention the importance of actively going out into the "field," to clean. The sections where the UK and US are discussed explain how biomedical waste is addressed through legislation but not necessarily through any other practical means. Cleans ups are straightforward and can be effective so if you can elaborate on this, do so.

-Non-routine Cleanups: I am not really sure what you mean by this or how you plan to expand off this.

-Communication: Keeping communication consistent between various environmental organizations is important in maintaining a coordinated and efficient taskforce to dispose of biomedical waste. I think this is something that the article either implied or ignored all together so definitely elaborate on this.

CLOSING COMMENTS: Overall, knowing your major and interests with the medical field I think this is an article you can effectively expand upon. Just make sure to be clear. Address the gaps and compare your proposals/solutions to the solutions previously mentioned in the article.

Kshea692 (talk) 05:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your valuable feedback, i will take your suggestions into consideration as i complete the assignment

The content is relevant to the topic and seems already well developed enough to complete a draft. Even though it is just an outline, it already seems to be a working rough draft. The article also is neutral which is a plus, good articles don't lean to one side. All sources are well developed and seem to be reliable and are working. The page is already well developed and if continued at this rate, it will become a great article. Ykhaleq (talk) 07:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your valuable feedback.

Draft Review-- (Mohammed Koya)

• Starting with the Syringe Tide movement, I would suggest either referring to another article through a hyperlink or summarizing the background info on the topic itself sightly more. The concept is great, but someone like me has little to no knowledge on what this is and a little clarification would be nice.
• Maybe talk more about how these toxins and poisons are harmful to our water source. Is there a chemical reaction going on? Is it harming the fish? Etc.

The overall structure of your article is great, I just recommend that as you continue your article think about clarity in the perspective of an unknowledgeable reader who is trying to gain more information. Maybe add lots of hyperlinks referring to other sources they can look at as well or add small background summaries of the topics being discussed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mzkoya26 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review Response

Thank you Inayah, I plan on adding reliable sources and narrowing down by section! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alekvuozzo (talk • contribs) 04:43, 29 April 2019 (UTC) Alekvuozzo (talk) 06:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)