User talk:Celsisa

YOU HAVE DECIDED TO WORK ON THE TERM PAPERRJBazell (talk) 20:06, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review

I'm really glad that you chose to improve the Lumpectomy page, I remember it being really sparse and I can tell you've already made really big content improvements on the article. I think the sections you added are extremely helpful, but it might be a good idea to make broad section with subtopics. For example, history should be a broad topic and then the subtopics would be the developments by each time period. You have really good broad topics right now, and I think your article would be really strengthened if you try to divide these into smaller fragments for fluidity and cohesion. I also think it would be a good idea for you to make use of Wikipedia's ability to link to other articles since you refer to many other related concepts that might be helpful for a reader, like ductal carcinoma, the NCCN, etc. I would love to see the history section be expanded as well as the modern use of lumpectomies. The information that you've added this far seems to be really good quality content, so I think as long as you work on involving more organization and more information, your article is going to turn out to be fantastic. Also look out to make sure that each paragraph of yours ends with a citation. As of right now, this is a great article that I found to be a lot more insightful and informative than the original state of the article, I'm excited to see where you take this!

Iswwiki (talk)

Welcome!

Hello, Celsisa, 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
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. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Hey Celsisa! - Eli 17 here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eli 17 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Eli 17 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

 :)

Feedback

Hi. I'm a little concerned about the sources you used in your draft. Don't forget that biomedical context is subject to very specific sourcing requirements. Your goal should be recent review articles - anything more than five years old is probably too old. You should have access to the best peer-reviewed journals through your library - use them. Don't rely on websites that don't give information about authorship, or how old they are, or whether they were subject to peer review.

You also need to make sure that your sources support the statements they are being used to support. For example, the statement

Bernard Fisher was the first person to compare the effectiveness of a lumpectomy to William Stewart Halstead's radical mastectomy

uses two supporting sources. The first of these is a biography of Fisher. Not only does it not support the statements made in the sentence, it also has the appearance of being a profile submitted by Fisher himself. It probably isn't sufficiently independent to be used as a reliable source. The second one is a paper co-authored by Fisher himself. This isn't a secondary source. You can't use someone's own work to comment on the significance of their own work. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)