User talk:Annamatt1025
| This user is a student editor in Duke_University/Bio_267_-_Behavioral_Ecology_(Fall_2018) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Topic: Dispersal Vector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispersal_vector
Hello, Annamatt1025, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian 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
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:52, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Comments on dispersal vectors page
[edit]Hello! Here are my comments on your dispersal vectors page.
In the introduction: For your first paragraph, I think it might work better if you just started right away with what a dispersal vector is, since that is the topic of the page. I also wonder if you could try paraphrasing instead of using a quote. In the last sentence of the second paragraph, starting “dispersal vectors may include self driven factors”, you give examples of biotic and abiotic factors, is there an example you can give for self driven factors as well? I think your introduction is good, it gives a good overview of the topic and leaves room for you to dive more into the specifics further in the article.
In the self generating dispersal section: It may be useful to redefine disseminules again, or at least link it to a different Wikipedia page. You also need a citation after the first sentence, where it says citation needed. When you are defining the 4 types of dispersal vectors, it may be more useful to have these as separate sentences or separated by semi-colons, so the words and their definitions can be seen more clearly than when they are all lumped together. Your second to last sentence (“in some cases…”) is a little hard to understand, do you mean ballochory is used more effectively with a secondary dispersal vector, or ballochory can be used as a secondary dispersal vector. Rephrasing may help clarify this.
In the animals section: the first paragraph needs a citation. Also, I suggest listing the main groups of dispersal (in the 3rd sentence) in the same order that you are going to talk about them in the following sections. I’m not sure you even need the second two paragraphs of the animals heading section (starting with “in seed dispersal, which is particularly well studied…” and “animals are also a large contributor …”) since you are going to go into these in more detail in the following sections, and you can just add this information to their respective sections below.
In the parasites section: If there could be a little more information added to this section, that would be good.
In the human effects of anemochory section: After the sentence “there are three main ways humans can affect anemochory”, you should list the 3 ways here. Then have the sentence “clearing land for development” start it’s own paragraph. Or, have that whole section be one large paragraph. Either way, you shouldn’t have the introduction and first example be the first paragraph, and then each of the other examples being separate paragraphs.
In the hydochory section: Again I think it is useful to list the things you are going to go into more detail about in the same order that intend to talk about them. So for the first sentence, when you say “hydrochory is dispersal using water, including ..” the list should be oceans, rivers, streams, and rain.
In the freshwater dispersal section: “Freshwater dispersal is primarily occurs”, you should remove the word is.
In the extreme weather section: “extreme weather that functions … include”, the word include should be the includes
Overall, I thought this was a really strong article! It is well organized and you have a lot of information. There were a couple of sentences that could be rewritten for clarity and conciseness, so you could just read through it and make a few grammatical or sentence structure changes. The only thing I am concerned with in overall structure is that you might have too many subcategories. This is definitely useful to an extent, to help divide up what you are saying into chunks. But at some point, having that many subdivisions makes it harder to read, and harder to figure out which broader category you are under. Some of these may work better as separate paragraphs, rather than separate subdivisions.