User talk:Nordliam/sandbox
Dissection Gameplan Feedback:
General: - Be sure to identify that this is your group sandbox location where common drafting will take place - If you "link" to a source, make sure that the link actually works. Neha's section needs this and you should ALL be checking everyone's work. -Please SHOW in addition to TELL. Do not just list sources. Ask yourself: "How are other Wikipedians supposed to assess that these are good sources?" If you don't put the sources in context, how can that happen? What sorts of relevant information do they contain that will help you add needed content (also, what is that needed content?)? This becomes particularly critical when you post to the talk pages. Effective writers guide their readers rather than ask them to divine what the author's meaning and intention is. -The section on the patagium/skin gets the closest to that in this draft. - Generally, great job on embedding the URLs of the pages you intend to work on here. -Remember that you are a team. Each of you is responsible for taking the lead on your independent sections, but then you compile them as a team in this sandbox. That means that you do more than just copy and paste things here. Here in this space you will: -Try to use parallel structure in the content of your group sandbox. It makes it easier to navigate and understand. -Help each other improve your individual contributions. This includes the general content that lives in the sandbox, but also the content that then goes "live". For example, I saw another group use this space to edit the talk posts they wanted to make.
-Great work using the Wikipedia headings and navigation tools to organize this space. I recommend that you do that on your individual pages as well.
Specific Feedback on sub-sections: -Tragus and larynx: See the general comment above about putting your sources in context both here and in the talk pages. -Cardiovascular and Thermoregulation: Same comments on context as above, but in this case, you will need integration. Our focus in the course is the anatomy, so you will need to link the cardiovascular anatomical elements to their role in thermoregulatory function and try not to stray too far into physiology (since that is not the focus of our course). So, my feeling now is that you *might* link to things you develop in other pages to the thermoregulation and heterothermy pages, but you may not develop too many things in these pages themselves. Also keep asking yourself" "What are the unique anatomical features I want to focus on?". The talk comments on this topic is a very good start but needs some development. I think some digging as to other possible pages where this information might live...such as the patagium, might be relevant. It would be fine if two people work on the same page but different aspects of it.
-Patagium: this is a very good start both here and in the talk page. Because the comments are set in context, it is more likely that someone will respond.
Example here is how embed a link to the [system wiki]
Osquaesitor (talk) 20:14, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Peer Edit/Review of Draft Additions (Week 7)
[edit]Andrew: Your suggested edits look good overall, I would suggest a few changes or additions, however. Namely, I would provide information about human/other mammalian cochlea for purpose of comparison, as your edit describes comparing the structure between those organisms. Alternatively, you could link to the specific pages (i.e the general mammalian/human cochlea) so that readers may easily access that information and readily compare and contrast the structures.
With respect to your perception of ultrasound waves section, you provide a succinct yet comprehensive mechanistic description of how the ultrasound waves are perceived, good job!
From referencing your page to edit, I agree about your suggestion to include a citation about the larynx producing the echolocation sounds. Finally, your edit drafts demonstrate all the qualities of a good Wikipedia addition--the content is neutral/objective, you provide correctly formatted and reliable citations, and the edits contain a clear/focused structure with integrated links to relevant information. Ostensibly, I would agree that this information would integrate well on the bat page itself within the echolocation subheading.
Juli: Structurally, Juli's edits also display clear syntax and are easy to comprehend. You provide ample, reliable citations in the correct format as well. My only suggestion is to perhaps include links to pertinent pages for purposes of comparison of succinctly integrating related information (which you mention earlier in your comments).
Neha: You provide succinct yet comprehensive information in your proposed edits as well. Namely, you make clear references (and include citations) for how bats wings exhibit adaptations for thermoregulation and gas exchange. I definitely didn't know that previously! My only suggestion is to perhaps add a sentence or two elaborating on what purpose the inclusion of the collagen and elastic fibrils performs in the overarching structure of the bat wing itself. Other than that, good work!
Shawnbrookins (talk) 19:16, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Andrew
After reviewing the micro-bat and bat page, I'd agree that this information would be helpful and useful to have on the either of those pages. With regards to your edits on the echolocation and the perception and production of ultrasound waves, I thought you did a great job keeping the content neutral, finding three more reliable sources to add to the page, and having a clear structure that will easily fit into the page. I'd suggest adding this to the bat page and then liking this on the micro bat page; this information would be useful and applies to all bats in general.
Juli I think you have a great start here. Your edits for the patagium section on the bat page were particularly clear, concise and informative, making a great addition to the page.The addition of two more reliable sources is always needed for pages like this and you've summarized the information in a way that helps the readers understand the anatomy and why it matters.
While you have other great ideas and information to add, I'd suggest sticking to one page and one subject. When you start focusing on too many things or adding to multiple pages, things could start to get complicated when it would make more sense to add to one page and put the links to the page on the other sources you feel this information needs to be on. As a reader, it's nice to have all the information on one site instead of going to three different pages. Overall, your additions and suggests look very well put together and thought out, and I think these would be great to add to the bat page.
Neha As you've all discussed some already, I'd agree that yours and Juli's sections to go together; are there any sources that may overlap for the both of you? I see that you both added that 85% gas exchange information, I'd suggest talking with each other and deciding where that'd best fit in. Overall, your summary was very clear and informative, keeping the content neutral and adding more reliable sources will definitely help the bat page. Like you said, I think once you add a little more background it will really bring everything together, as well as connect information between you and Juli. You all have a great start, now I think it's just find combing and figuring out where you want to make these additions.
Hartmacl (talk) 00:42, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Andrew
I would definitely try to fix the missing citation about the larynx producing the ultrasound or simply add it to yours and remove it from the uncited reference to it. Any thoughts on adding an image for the cochlea??? I think pictures are very helpful to understand a structure and location. What do you mean by "turns"? I do not know if this is possible or allowed but what if you could add actual recordings of the sound produced by the bat's ultrawaves???? I really like how you broke down the anatomical map of the correlating structures!!! Looks good!
Juli
Maybe you could state what the four bones are that support the bat wing. I agree with your peers about maybe being too broad and possibly focusing on one aspect of the wing, like just the skin or just the areodynamics. Sometimes less is more, especially if you go into deep detail about one thing. I would try to rephrase the sentence about bat skin, it is a little wordy. You seem to have done a lot of research and the info you have looks good!
Neha
How are bat lungs similar to mammal lungs? Maybe you could add a link to mammal lungs in this? How exactly are the bat wings important in thermoregualation? Maybe a mechanism would be good here??? I agree on trying to connect your part to Juli's. That would give a nice transition and flow!! Good job Neha I hope this helps and I learned a lot about bats just by reading this!!! You guys have clearly put in some work! Adriennescarcella (talk) 13:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)Adrienne
Comments from Liz Aguilar :)
[edit]Andrew
I really like how you broke up the ultrasound waves section into two different sections. I think this will prove to be beneficial for your readers. A picture of the cochlea in the "Perception of Ultrasound Waves" section and a picture of the larynx in the Production section would also be beneficial to your readers as well. I like how you talked about the styohyal bone and use the tympanic bone to talk about its position, but I think it would be better if the readers knew its exact position in more detail.You say the styohyal bone is "lying across the surface" of the tympanic bone. Is that dorsal? anterior? from what angle? Maybe after you do your dissections this will be more clear. The same goes for the other bones and positions you mentioned. Great start Andrew!
Juli
Very nice job describing what the patagium is, but I found myself asking some even more specific questions. How does the muscle contribute to flight? Is that the only component you mentioned that contributes to actual flight? Kinda of seems that way based on the information you provided. Great general summary, I just think the readers would benefit from a little more details. Adding photo graphs of these muscles and tissues will also only enhance your summary. Great job Juli, keep pressing on!!!
Neha
Great title for your section. A couple of comments: You start off by talking about two main components "gas exchange and thermoregulation," but then you go off topic and talk about blood flow and flight and then go back to talking about Gas exchange. I think this may confuse readers a bit. You also say thermoregulation is important during flight and say why it's important, but say how. Reading it, I really wanted to know more anatomical components, I felt this was a great start but could use more detail. Also I would recommend staying on topic as much as possible, great job Neha :)!!!
Liz0618 (talk) 02:16, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Feedback From Tyler
[edit]Andrew- I like your addition seems informative and clear. The prose could possibly be shortened to make the same information more succinct. Also, it might be better to define what constitutes high frequency the first time you mention it rather than the second. Good Work.
Juli- You mind want to specify what bones make up the bat wing, rather than the more general arm and hand bones. Also, linking to the wiki pages for dermis and epidermis could be useful. In addition, you could probably cut out a few words to make the passage more succinct. Good work, this is a quality addition.
Neha- the phrase "surface area in the wings allows for about 85% gas exchange of the total body surface area" is a bit confusion and could use clarification. Also, adding a few more links to wikipedia articles of topics you discuss can help the non-biologist reading this. Good work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:603:E80:5A3C:BC5F:D662:25B6:2A4C (talk) 03:42, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Comments on Peer Reviews:
[edit]-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) 04:07, 26 March 2017 (UTC)