User talk:Plumbob200

Welcome!

Hello, Plumbob200, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Elysia and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:58, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hey James! I really liked your article. I would recommend reorganizing it into neat categories, as I’m sure you saw some other students doing as you completed your peer reviews. I also didn’t have mine split up into anything other than paragraphs and I think it will improve the readability of both of our articles a lot. There were some areas throughout the article that could be phrased better and I flagged a few as examples. I think polishing those edges will really improve it as a whole. The information is good, it just needs further revisions. One thing I may recommend adding is examples. A few practical studies that have looked at cancer evolution may be worth adding. I appreciate the opportunity to evaluate your article. Christie ChristieBirdsong (talk) 09:24, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi James, This is a really cool article! I definitely learned new things while reading it. From a content perspective, I think that it is looking great. My main recommendation would be to format it by putting in headers and subheaders to break it down into smaller chunks. While not necessary, some examples of recent studies and maybe a diagram or two could be useful as well. I put in a few comments on the article itself, but it's looking good! Lang1803 (talk) 18:34, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review - Mosbey

James,

I enjoyed reading your article. I've always found cancer fascinating despite the extreme detrimental effects it has. Like the other two have previously said, I would break the sections into sub-sections where possible. I believe this would help readers discern where you are wanting them to switch their focus from one topic of cancer selection to another. At some point down the road, I know we will also include diagrams/pictures into the articles to facilitate the visual learners and this will help understanding of your middle section immensely (with it being very dense with information). There were a few grammatical errors and run-on sentences that I believe can be corrected easily so I'd advise reviewing through and correcting what you find and what others may have commented on. Otherwise, great article. Interested to see how the final product turns on! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmosbey17 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Peer review review

Hi James! This is a very interesting topic, and I think you've got a good start here. I agree with the suggestions of your reviewers - to divide into sections and give examples. I left a lot of comments in the body of your article where I thought things were unclear, or where examples would help. I think that the first paragraph can be greatly condensed (you don't need all the detail about the 4 postulates of natural selection). Also, when you are dividing into sections, one of your references states "Evolutionary theories are critical for understanding cancer development at the level of species as well as at the level of cells and tissues, and for developing effective therapies", so you could consider dividing the sections into 1. Level of cells and tissues (like your second paragraph) and 2. Level of species (where cancer is the selective agent). You can subdivide the sections even further if that makes sense. Also, make sure in the final version that your first paragraph conforms to the Wikipedia lead section format (a summary of your whole article). You've done a really great job finding references, so hopefully it won't be too hard to find some specific examples in them to elaborate on your key points.Advevol (talk) 01:54, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Response to Peer Review

I would like to say thank you for all of your comments and suggestions. All of them were extremely helpful in getting me to a final draft. As all of the reviews advised I did break my article into sections. Your suggestions in regards to this were very helpful. It was difficult for me to provide examples of specific instances in which cancer therapy is hindered by tumor heterogeneity. This is because the genetic diveristy of cells within a tumor is the obstacle that therapy has to overcome and is the evolutionary advantage that cancer has over the therapy. Therefore, I edited that out and spoke about tumor heterogenity and provided a link to that wikipedia page. I took the same approach with initiation and progression and did not provide examples of different ways that cancer initiates and progresses, but instead provided a link to the carcinogenesis wikipedia page when I discussed cancer initiation. I did not provide pictures in my article because when they would be beneficial in my article, a link which I inserted will take the reader to a wikipedia page that goes into greater detail than my article does. In fact one of the biggest obstacles that I had to navigate around with this topic was to look at cancer selection through two different lenses. First, through the lense of how cancer overcomes negative selective pressure that is placed upon it, in other words through the lense of natural selection. Secondly, through the lense of cancer as a selective pressure like that of natural selection and artificial selection as it acts upon the populataions of animal hosts whcih it resides in. Therefore, the first half of my article was backed by numerous information that can be better explained by already existing wikipedia articles that go into greater detail than mine, and because of this I leaned heavily on links to these pages to help a reader better understand the concepts being discussed in my article. By doing this I feel I did not get lost in the weeds and repeat already accepted wikipedia articles. Furthermore, there were revisions which I did in which I deleted sentences all together. I did this after considering your peer review comments that made me realize that the information I deleted was not needed at all. I found these to be some of the most beneficial peer review suggestions, so I would like to say thank you for those. Also, I corrected the gramatical errors that were suggested for correction. Again, please let me say thank you all very much for taking the time to review my work. Your critiques were very intelligent,insightful, and helpful. Thank you. --Plumbob200 (talk) 16:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Cancer selection

Hello, Plumbob200,

Thanks for creating Cancer selection! I edit here too, under the username Doomsdayer520 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Thank you for your new article on Cancer selection.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:31, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for writing Cancer selection! Wikipedia appreciates your contribution! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2019 (UTC)