User talk:LinkageDis/sandbox

Decade of the Brain Peer Review Overall a great fact oriented and objective article. A few possible improvements

Per Claire's recommendation on run-on sentences, perhaps split up the second sentence of the "Global Adoption" section (each government has its own sentence)

"The scientific accomplishments which occurred during the Decade of the Brain are compelling, however." is a rather subjective statement

Great job, David Zhao — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidxyz (talk • contribs) 03:52, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review:

Your article is neutral and everything appears to be relevant to your topic. The citations look good and the links work. The only minor criticism that I have is that some of your sentences are very long and I think they would flow better if you divided them into several parts, but that might be my personal preferences.

For example: “Newton's Principia Mathematica, published in a small personal printing in 1686 but not published widely and in English until years later, is rather the text cited as revolutionary or otherwise radical in the development of science-- perhaps partially due to its temporal proximity to the Glorious Revolution.” I think this sentence could be divided into two to make the content clearer.

Otherwise, I thought your article was clear and interesting! Claire.ren (talk) 18:35, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Really interesting second article! Your contribution fits very well with the intro. I think it's well-written and pretty neutral. The sources also look credible! Claire.ren (talk) 01:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Claire.ren that the article appears neutral and fits well. The links work and facts seem to be cited. My one question is what distinguishes the Decade of the Brain from the Decade of the Mind page you linked. Is there some way to incorporate your information to that page or are they different events? CaldDalA (talk) 03:39, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]