User talk:Jajacobs7694
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Jajacobs7694, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam 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. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review #1
[edit]Hi there! My name is Diana Ciccolini and I am peer reviewing your article!
The Lead Section: - Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic? I believe that the lead helps me understand the importance of physical fitness. The fact that nutrition is talked about really catches the reader's eye. It gives a short history about how it was used to be able to carry out daily activities without being fatigued, which is a great piece of evidence.
- Does the lead section report the most important information? This section does report the most important information, although more info could be added. Maybe expand upon why it is so important and then you can further expand on that in a subheading below.
Structure:
- Are the sections organized well? Would they make more sense presented some other way?
The structure of this article starts with the general information in the lead section, then goes down to the definition of fitness and what it is. It dives into more detail about the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, which I think is great information but could possibly be placed somewhere else. The training section is awesome - there is a great amount of very interesting details. I think this should be right after the definition section. Maybe the Activity Guidelines could be placed somewhere underneath a heading rather than a large heading itself.
Balance - Are any major view points left out? I don't see any major points left out.
- Is anything off-topic? Nothing is off topic.
Neutral - Is the article neutral in tone? Yes
- Can you guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? I cannot because this is more of a matter-of-fact article, stating factual evidence and nothing more than statistics and other points.
- Are there words or phrases that don't seem neutral? Look for "the best," "most people," "obviously, [x]" Nothing I could find!
- Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." It does not.
Reliable sources - What types of sources does the article primarily use? The types of sources I saw were journals, articles, or excerpts from accredited institutions.
- Are there unsourced statements in the article? Nothing that I could find was unsourced :) Good job!
- Are there only a few sources, or is most of the information from only one or two sources? There are a plethora of sources, which is great! 43 sources is a lot of information available to readers.
Overall, I think this is great. Keep up the good work and I hope you take my advice into consideration.
--Diana — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dciccoli (talk • contribs) 16:46, 12 April 2016 (UTC)