Jump to content

User:Mczachor1/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mczachor1 (talk | contribs) at 03:34, 1 March 2017 (Edits I Plan on Making to Frank-Starling Law Article: Added another edit I plan on making). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Evaluation Notes on Physiology Article

  • The sentence about the Noble Prize in Physiology does not seem to fit in the introduction and is not cited
  • The sentence defining a physiologic state could be integrated better in another place
  • Not all facts are cited, such as the sentence about The American Physiological Society
  • The sentences about the American Physiological Society are plagiarized
  • It may read better if all of the achievements from the history section were added together under a different title or under subtitle of the history section
  • References 5 and 22 may not be reliable sources
  • The Human Physiology section seems to jump from point to point and a short summary that reads better is needed
  • Other sections like how physiology contributes to modern medicine may make the page stronger

Edits I Plan on Making to Frank-Starling Law Article

The article has very little citations throughout so I am planning on increasing the reliability of the article by adding more sources. The history section and the physiology section of the article also need to be expanded. In the history section, I think it would be beneficial to talk specifically about Frank and Starling's finding separately and then how both of their findings together were used to formulate the Frank-Starling Law. In the physiology section, I am planning on expanding the information about the cellular basis of the mechanism by including information about all the cellular processes that contribute to the mechanism. I would also like to add more about why this mechanism is significant in the human heart. Some sentences in the article also use words like we, our, etc. and I think it would help make the article sound more encyclopedic if the wording of those sentences were changed. The first paragraph also seems a little repetitive and jumps around a little. Rewording it and adding a little bit more information may help it flow better.

Possible Sources