User talk:Newmansr/sandbox

Group Assignment for 3/10 Feedback

General: 1. Edit this page so that it is clear that it will be used as the common sandbox. So move that identifier and link up a bit from where it is now. Otherwise, this is very very well done. 2. Great job embedding the URLs of the relevant pages. That makes everyone's lives easier. 3. Compiling your talk page post's here was a brilliant idea. It gives the group the opportunity to craft these together and word them in ways that will help everyone. However, please SHOW in addition to TELL. As listed, how are other Wikipedians supposed to assess of these are good sources if you don't put them in context? What sorts of relevant information do they contain that will help you add needed content (like what?)? The Snakeskin talk post that you listed is more appropriate and a good model to follow. The Duvernoy's talk post is also good but a bit more development will make it more useful to you all.

4. Try to use good organization and parallel structure here. It makes for easier navigation and a clearer understanding of what your gameplan is.

5. As you move on, you will quickly begin to see a need/desire to add images. Make sure that you have completed the student training and you can also go here for a very comprehensive how-to and resources on contributing to Wikimedia. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents

Specific Feedback:

Duvernoy's Gland 1. How is the Alexander et al. 2017 reference going to be useful? Try to put these in context and what you might be getting from them. Do not expect that others will be reading the references for you and THEN deciding if they are relevant. Synthesize and report. 2. Duvernoy's gland: Is the Alexander et al. 2017 ref. related to this? What do you mean by applicable information? Time to start showing instead of telling. Is one of the "Group References" listed the one that belongs here? 3. Your textbook (Ch. 6) will be a good place to start.

Vomeronasal Organ: 1. How do you plan on improving it? What is missing? Why is that important?

Skin: 1. How come this does not have parallel structure with the other "Individual references" and lacks an actual reference like the other two?Osquaesitor (talk) 19:01, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review Assignment Week 7

After reviewing the pages you're editing and your suggested edits, I'd say overall you have a lot of great information to help get this page get up from a stub level. All of your material is neutral, and you've seemed to compile a lot more reliable sources, which is what your pages were missing noticeably. While your page is missing a lot of information, you seem to have a significant amount of snakeskin. I'd suggest looking more at the reptile page and making sure you're not repeating any information that is already provided on Wikipedia so you're not wasting your time with some of the features, you can always link to this page.

I'd suggest finding some more sources for the Duvernoy's Gland, and your paraphrasing seems clear and concise in regards to the Vomeronsasal organ. Overall you all have a great start on this page, and if you are looking for any more sources, you can look at some of the sources I have in my sandbox as we've been actively looking up reptile sources as well! Great work.

Hartmacl (talk) 02:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Response I like your suggestion to go back and double check the reptile page. I've looked over it a couple of times, but need to go back and dig into it a little deeper before anything gets set. I also need to look at that page to look for linkable topics. Appreciate the feedback!Newmansr (talk) 02:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review/Copy Edit (3/23/17)

Sara: Really great job finding an ample amount of information regarding snake skin, I too agree there is a good amount of information that could be added on the actual skin (aside from the scales). Because you have so much information from a variety of sources, I think the hardest thing for you now is going to be figuring out how to effectively put the content into sections that will best represent the material. From the information I have read from your sandbox, my suggestion would be to try to formulate it into 3 sections: Display (appearance), Function, and Evolution (regarding why the particular structures of the skin are the way they are). Your sources all seem to be providing neutral information.

Ryan: Make sure to embed a link into your article when you are writing about it like so: Duvernoy's gland so it is easier for people to refer to it when they are reading your comments. I think you have solid information, but maybe you could elaborate a little more as to where you're going to embed this information into the article. The article for the Duvernoy's gland is so bare I would be interested in knowing if you'll be making new sections, or simply adding to the Function section. If I were you, I would try to add one or two new sections depending on the information you end up collecting. Also, an addition of a picture to this article could be very useful. If it is possible to obtain some sort of picture from your dissection I would suggest using that.

Huy: I think you have found some quality information and have a good idea as to how you are going to structure it. Although, one addition that I might suggest as unnecessary is the relative anatomy to other organs. In the Structure section of the vomeronasal organ it contains a very good visual representation of where the organ is associated with all the other organs/structures within the head. I feel like that gives a good enough map for the reader and not much more information is need. Besides that, your sources seem to be good and contain neutral information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cksmith8 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Response I love the section suggestions that you have proposed for the snakeskin page!! I need to start organizing the information that I've found accordingly, and will probably take your suggestion further and start adding subsections and perhaps some other sections if necessary. Thank you for the feedback!!Newmansr (talk) 02:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

Sara: You have so much good stuff here, that your problem will probably be narrowing your sources into a cohesive draft that adds information to the page that you're editing, and doesn't include information that is already included elsewhere on Wikipedia. Your sources all seem to be from encyclopedias, but perhaps you could search some journal articles that research the change of snake skin over time, and how earlier snake ancestors were different from modern snakes. Once you figure a direction to go forward with, it seems that you have more than enough information in order to put together a solid addition.

Ryan: Keep searching for sources and more information. Perhaps you could think about adding a potential picture of the gland to the page in order to help orientate the position of the gland in the snake's head. Other than that, you might want to try to do some research into the evolutionary differences between the venom and Duvernoy's gland, and find out whether or not they have an ancestral gland they both stem from, or if they both arose analogous from one another.

Huy: One addition you could make, like Ryan's above, is a picture of the vomeronasal gland in the dissection of your garter snake. Another thing you could do is attempt to find experiments that have been done to manipulate the gland and its function, and how it's been researched in a laboratory setting. You have a good direction here, but a diversification in sources may be helpful in finding additional information in order to improve your edit.

KoreanBobsledder (talk) 05:42, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Response I like your suggestion of going back and trying to look into other journal articles for information of the history of the snakeskin. I made an attempt previously, but it didn't really lead me anywhere promising. Following your suggestion, I'll be giving it another go, and hopefully this time, with some narrower search parameters, I'll have success! Thank you for the feedback!!Newmansr (talk) 02:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments on Peer Reviews:

-Read these comments carefully and compare them to the feedback posted for you on Sakai on the content of your first draft under Resources and Wikipedia Assignments Feedback. There is a folder there for your team.Osquaesitor (talk) 19:33, 29 March 2017 (UTC)