User talk:Adriennescarcella/sandbox

Group Gameplan Feedback:

In General:

- Be sure to identify that this is your group sandbox location where common drafting will take place. One way you can do that is by organizing your sandbox so that things are easier to find and the space is easier for you and everyone else to navigate. Here is an example of how you can do that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ayersmm/sandbox. I strongly recommend that you do that in this shared sandbox and that all of you do it in your individual sandboxes as well. Adrienne, you can even create a section for your own drafts that is separate from the group workspace.

-Try to use parallel structure in the content of your group sandbox. It makes it easier to navigate and understand. If all of your sections are in different formats, it will make it hard for you to work collaboratively and help each other. It is also harder for individuals outside your team to give you feedback.

-Please SHOW in addition to TELL. Do not just list sources. Ask yourselves: "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. See some of my specific comments below.

--Start embedding the URLs for the pages you are editing. That makes it easier for you to get feedback from anyone on your proposed changes because it enables rapid navigation to the relevant page. That will help you as well and make it easy to navigate to talk pages as needed.

-Check out the bird anatomy [[1]] page and look for the way you are listed with regard to how you assigned the article for yourself. Please fix it so that it reflects your role accurately.

- 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 [[2]]. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents.

-Finally, as you find materials that your team-mates may find useful, put those comments either in their section or a relevant element of the talk page.

Specifically:

Nervous System In the discussion of the nervous system, you state that a bird anatomy page does not exist on Wikipedia. However, a quick search on that exact search term indicates that such a page does [[3]]. All of you should be paying attention to it and I suspect that perhaps you meant something else?. Luckily for you, the nervous system discussion is quite minimal and as such, you may be able to either expand the existing section or provide links to other wiki pages dealing with avian neuronal structures that you link to. As you can see, the material that exists focuses on [vision] and the way the avian brain is [[4]] which is a low interest list.I suspect this is the case because a list is not very informative at all. One other thing that may help you move forward is to look at the [DO] list for articles on the pallium talk page.

Although you provide no context for how the articles you list (which need to be in Wikipedia citation format), I can see that some of these may be more physiological than biological. Explain how these will help you discuss unique anatomical features. What you could have done next was post to the bird anatomy talk page.

Digestive, Circulatory and Immune Systems

- Both the discussion and the presentation of the post on the talk page are a good example of SHOW. The structure of interest and its potential function, as well as a possible link of interest (although see my note above about using Wikipedia citation format) are provided. This makes it a lot more likely that someone will be able to help you. As you keep moving forward, you will start identifying specific things that you feel like you might add. I would post these as separate questions by each person taking the lead on a topic. I can see the potential efficiency of one person posting everyone's questions at once. However, only that person gets alerted when someone answers. Also, it is good practice to refrain from using the real names of individuals. That is why you have screen names. Finally, it is also a very good idea to check your post for typos and spelling errors.

Osquaesitor (talk) 22:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Draft Peer Review:

I'm not sure of where to locate the drafts for the other edits (it would be great if all of you can incorporate them in this sandbox), but here are my comments for the drafts presented in this user's sandbox:

Function of bursa of fabricius: Maybe take out the section that explains what the B-cells do since you already have the link to the page of the [B-cell]. This could also help with the last sentence: it was confusing to refer back to the organ (i.e. the bursa of facricius) when you were previously talking about the B-cells. Therefore, I would suggest that you clarify what “this organ” is (i.e. the bursa of fabricius).

Anatomy of bursa of fabricius: Overall, great description of the anatomy of the structure. I agree that an image will be very appropriate for this section to portray each layer you just described. The only thing that I would suggest is take out the exclamation point at the end of the last sentence just to make it more “neutral” just like a stated fact.

Avian Ear: Is the avian ear homologous to the human ear? If so, use that term instead of saying, "...have the same structures as..." just to make the sentence more concise. Be careful to always add a citation. I believe that your first paragraph lacks a citation. Other than that, this draft would be great to add to the article section. I would also suggest finding an image of the described avian ear structure.

Overall, these drafts are a good start. Hopefully you can find these specific structures in your dissection animal. Dizzle32 (talk) 03:09, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review Post

Bursa of Fabricius section- I agree that an image would be great for this section! Hopefully you're able to find a good one. On the function topic in this section, I don't know that it needs such an emphasis (3 out of 5 sentences) on what B-lymphocytes are. It seems like superfluous information, especially because you provide a link to the B-cell page where the reader can read more about them, but also because it isn't specific to this species because its a general definition of b-cells that applies to many species. The anatomy section looks very good! My only question is, where are you going to put this section? In the sparrow page? Is this true for all birds?

Avian Ear section- Where is this section going to be? Overall looks like a good concise definition. I disagree with an earlier comment, I think that "intricate melodies and tones" is perfectly fine and neutral. My only suggestion would be to maybe find more sources on the topic? The one used looks like it has really good information, but other sources may provide more details in ways this one does not.

Digestive System section- Very clear and concise. Not much to comment on for the draft, it's pretty short, and rightfully so based on your assessment to not overwhelm the article. Maybe there's another place you could improve the digestive system section? A picture may be helpful. Julisymmons (talk) 02:50, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review: Article Draft Critique

Bursa of Fabricius: I think this part of the article has great language for potential readers of Wikipedia. Under the anatomy section, I would try to rephrase your sentence beginning with, "The bursa of fabricius is surrounded by 10,000 plus follicles..." and replace it with something like, "The bursa of fabricius is surrounded by more than 10,000 follicles..." to maintain an elevated level of language. I do think you could expand more aspects of your function section since some readers may have limited knowledge of immune system components. I do like how you added the links to other pages, but I would just add more information to your page itself to make it easier on the reader.

Avian Ear: Although this section is relatively short, I think it is quite informative. I agree with an earlier comment with suggesting finding more sources on the topic. I reviewed your reference, and it was from 1994, so maybe find a more updated article? Similarly to the previous section in your drafts section, I think the language is at a sufficient level for Wikipedia, however, I would comb through to make sure it is grammatically free of errors.

Digestive System: I think this piece was written well, and I especially appreciated the links to existing articles in Wikipedia. I'm just curious as to how else you can add to this section to beef it up a little. Would an image of the internal anatomy be helpful to highlight the locations of the gizzard and proventriculus?

In general, I feel that the drafts you all have are written well for a general Wikipedia audience, and have great potential for additional information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe.Perez (talk • contribs) 04:49, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

As a group these are well drafted with lots of great information and very well organized. I think everyone should include picture and where there sections are going to placed in wikipedia. Bursa of Fabricius (Immune System)- Well drafted, I would not repeat the beginning of a sentence with " the" all the time. I would look into other aspects of the immune system and where this Bursa of Fabricius is located. very good attention to detail.

Avian Ear- I would look at the anatomy of how it allows this to function. I would watch the wording of similar to humans, is it similar or identical in structure? On a very good start and well drafted. maybe more resource?

Digestive System - Proventriculus Very well drafted. Could you maybe compare this digestive system to the us humans? I would also look at the anatomy, of where everything is located. And maybe have a section of its own on the gizzard. Good sources. Very good start. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kushanna (talk • contribs) 22:26, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

Grant: your idea of including information about the gizzard and the proventriculus and the enzymes that produces is a really good idea. A good image of the proventriculus could be helpful to see better its location and its relation to the gizzard. For the avian ear, I suggest naming the advantages of having a short ossicles in the sparrow. Overall, you guys are in the right track! Blancapaola2 (talk) 19:41, 25 March 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) 00:12, 30 March 2017 (UTC)