User talk:Mira pasawala/sandbox

@Mira pasawala, Patrick V1, and Willc22: Nice work on your draft.

Don't use "Introduction" as a header or subheader. It's fine to have a couple paragraphs under a header and then add a subheader below that.
You shouldn't be writing about the details of experimental work, most of the time. For example, you wrote

A specific test was administered to show the affinity called the guinea pig ilieum assay which evaluated μ-opioid receptor agonist activity. This test concluded that it had a potent and specific antinociceptive effect in vivo.

This kind of information is far too specific for most Wikipedia articles. At the same time, it's also too vague - if you want to write about something like this, you need to provide enough context that the average person would be able to understand the context and importance of what they're reading. The statement is also unsourced. Everything in Wikipedia needs a supporting citation.

This doesn't just apply to this section - the problem exists in quite a few of the sections.

Make sure that you link terms that the average reader may be unfamiliar with; for example, you mention "receptor affinity and selectivity", but I don't believe you either explain the terms (a short explanation would be helpful) or link to articles where the reader could learn more.
Section headers use sentence capitalization, not title capitalization; only the first word of the title, and proper nouns, should be capitalized.

Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We have only been linking words once even if they are used multiple times throughout the text. Is that a correct way of doing that? Mira pasawala (talk) 02:33, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would a "see also" page be helpful in this case? Mira pasawala (talk) 02:35, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]