User talk:Sydneyey/sandbox

Overview of Natural Resource Engineering website: http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/study/subjects/natural-resources-engineering/--Sydneyey (talk) 21:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review By Emily Roe

Move the introductory paragraph to before the table of contents as is seen in published Wikipedia pages. This can be done by deleting the header what it currently above the intro paragraph. I would expand on the areas of research with some actual technical information about natural resources engineering to give the reader some more information about the principles and science of natural resources engineering. The sections covering the courses and careers in natural resources engineering are very good and thorough, but the article could use some information on the actual science and engineering principles of natural resource engineering: what it is, what it deals with, problems in the field, etc. A good place to start could be expanding on the areas of research section. Also, maybe expand the careers a bit with a few sentences about the specifics of each career listed.

Going through the peer review checklist:

Everything you have is relevant to the topic, nothing was distracting or on a tangent
Everything is neutral, there do not appear to be any issues with bias
I don't think there are any viewpoints which are over or underrepresented, but be sure to pay attention to this as you continue to add things to the article
Your citations look good, links work well and sources look reputable
I don't see any issues with not citing information or biased sources, but again make sure you pay attention to this as you continue to add
I don't think any of your current information is out of date, but I definitely feel that the article is missing some information about the field itself, rather than just about the courses and careers with a small section about research (see paragraph above)

What you have looks good! Feel free to reach out to me if you have any more questions. Efroe (talk) 16:23, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review by Garrett Holt

Your topic sentence is really good and introduces the rest of the lead section effectively. The lead section covers alot of ground and gives a very descriptive synopsis of the subject as a whole. The article is well organized and there is good content in each section but I do think you could make the coverage of each section a little more evenly distributed. Also, although it isn't required, a couple pictures of relevant material would help brighten up the article as well as provide more context for the topics discussed in the various sections. You maintain a neutral and scholarly tone and the article sounds professional. I think expanding on the roles of some of the jobs listed would help provide a little more information for the specific roles and applications of natural resources engineering. I wouldn't do it for every job you have listed because that would take way too much time but perhaps expound upon a couple of jobs. Your citations and sources look good and overall your draft looks great so far! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjholt97 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]