User talk:Mejoh004/sandbox

Peer Review

I think you did a great job of providing a great background for the readers that provides a lot of information. I assume that you intend to add these sections you've created after the lead section in the original article, but if you aren't I suggest that you talk about Neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation in the background. I also think it would be good to distinguish which NBIA disorders fall under classic and/or atypical presentation from the lead section. I also think it would benefit the reader if there were hyper links to thinks like cerebellar ataxia, truncal hypotonia, pyramidal signs if there are wiki pages associated. Overall you have a great start with your organization, keeping the article nuetral, and providing good information/credible references.Kbraxton (talk) 14:44, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

peer review

Hey! I think you have a ton of great information and some good sources. You do have a lot of fragment sentences which makes it seem a little choppy... can you hyperlink any other these (globus pallidus, substantia nigra pars reticula, striatum and cerebellar dentate nuclei) if not, and you think it's worth it, maybe a little blurb about what they do would be nice. can you hyperlink any of these also? (ron metabolism, impaired phospholipid and ceramide metabolism, lysosomal disorders) I think the two presentatino sectinos could be smaller subheadings in a larger symptoms section. what is the "eye of the tiger sign" can you explain that a little more? what else are you going to include? I like the information you have and you're headed in a great direction EIhannifin (talk) 17:04, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in

This looks great! You should be in a good place to start moving it to the mainspace! ProfJRL (talk) 01:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]