User talk:Slatere4
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Slatere4, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian 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. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:41, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Ashley Hughes
[edit]Hello, my name is Ashley Hughes and I am a junior here at MSU. I am studying human biology and currently in the pre-PA program. I am looking forward to learning more about what this class has to offer, and hopefully give me more insight about the human body for my future career. Ashleynicole11 (talk) 01:32, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello!
[edit]Hi, Slatere4 -- welcome to Wikipedia! As Ian mentioned, the Teahouse is a great resource for new editors. But did you know that Wikipedia also has an extensive help library for common questions? Of course, if you run into a question or problem, you're always welcome to get in touch with me either by email or on my talk page. Happy editing! Fraudoktorkatie (talk) 14:26, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review
[edit]Hello!
First of all, I really enjoyed reading your first draft. You did a really good job revamping the lead section! I liked your section on dissection alternatives especially, it was very interesting to read about. I feel like for as broad of a topic as you have, you did a great job picking out what edits to do and accomplishing them well. The only thing I would say is to be careful about the language you use. There were a couple of times you slipped the word "definitely" in there. For example:"The United States is definitely expanding in the subjects of technology...". While any other time it would be totally okay to use, it doesn't really fit a "encyclopedia" styled writing. Other than that, there is nothing else I would fix! AudreyMMull (talk) 22:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review
[edit]Hello,
I think that your section of the History of Dissection in India is very well done. You included several citations and it is clear that the information was transformed into your own words. This section also describes several perspectives in a neutral way, such as from ancient hunters, the Aryan rule, and Buddhism. I feel that adding more information from other sources would be beneficial for this article. The source you cited was used multiple times throughout from a scholarly article, I believe, and contains very useful information from this article. However, more sources might be able to offer even more information about the topic of the History of Dissection, and perhaps, more current information that 2013. Overall, I think your first edits to this article are very well done. Mastejma (talk) 02:31, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
A cup of tea for you!
[edit]
|
Thanks very much for your edits to Dissection, it is nice to have someone pay some attention to the article. I've left a few comments below :) Tom (LT) (talk) 23:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC) |
Many thanks for your edits. It's great to have new editors on board - but being new, you may not be familiar with many of the ways Wikipedia operates. I point to one edit, here:
You've replaced "good" online citations with three citations to other Wikipedia articles - a big nono. Wikipedia articles are not "reliable sources" (WP:MEDRS) because, as you have noticed when you are editing, they are contstantly evolving.
That said, thanks again for the majority of your edits. It looks like Dissection may soon be ready to be a "good article" - there are only 19 "good" articles relating to anatomy so it'd be a great addition :). Happy editing, and let me know how else I can help, --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)