User talk:Dbarnha1/sandbox

This is looking good - please respond to the reviewers' comments, and check the references and other suggestions. NIce work! --Amille75 (talk) 04:13, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bhagat Peer Review:
General Comments:
Seemed like the main purpose of the article was to describe the best conditions in which the species grew like salinity and sand accretion.
I liked the detail and organization of the article. I think you managed to convey the growing conditions very well. However, I think you should focus more on how knowing the growing conditions will affect the nutritional value as a crop. You talked about it at the very end, but I think you should focus on it a little more.
Grammar:
I think you should mention what accretion means (I had to look it up). I could not find any major grammatical errors.
For the species name, you need to italicize it.
References:
There are 5 distinct references
Each of the references is from a journal
I don’t think you need to include the date retrieved in your reference. Also, I think you only need to include the reference once at the bottom of your article.

1. This article has a good focus on traits related to its role as a perennial crop such as root systems, sand accretion, soil salinity, germination, and dormancy. 2.Your information was clear and relevant but I think it would be easier to process if you separated the topics. Perhaps make a paragraph dedicated to germination, a paragraph dedicated to salinity and sand accretion, etc. 3. I would consider talking a little bit about the implication of these traits in the context of its value as a perennial crop. 4. The grammar seemed well done but the genus and species italicized system needs to be incorporated. 5. The references appeared good and relevant but as mentioned above one of them is listed multiple times.

Hey! This is Anna Paffrath, here to make a few edits to your contribution!

a. The main take home message of this entry is that Leymus arenarius can withstand abnormal living conditions and have improved or evolved because of those conditions. I liked that in some places this entry would define terms that were not common to your average reader. However, it is a little difficult to pick up the take home message. Maybe it would be a little easier to understand if you read over a couple of bulk sentences and reworded them in a more simple way. Can you define accretion?

b. 1/3 of the way through you say "is a good predictor of L. arenarius's ability" make sure that's possessive. 1/2 through "40% of the seedlings were able to emerge". Maybe make "Another factor affecting..." a new paragraph. Rewrite sentence "The populations of L. arenarius grown along the coast presented (delete with) greater root biomass...". Use "began" in place of "begun". At the end of the last paragraph, "In recent year, conservationists..."

c. There are 5 different sources used, however they are inconsistent. Look over the layout of proper citations and rewrite some of them. (You use "pp" in some and not in others, it is unnecessary) Also, there is a way to reuse citations without creating a new tab for them. You can find out how to do this using the editing wikipedia handout.

Over good contribution!! - Anna Paffrath