User talk:Zeeshaan Chunawala/Paul Hugh Emmett

I hope my peer editing comments are helpful. Dlu16 (talk) 02:11, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I finished peer reviewing your article. Adevire1 (talk) 22:26, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MH comments

Excellent job on this article! It's not only well researched, but also takes full advantage of the integrated Wikipedia format. As you revise your draft, keep the following in mind:

1. Make sure all citations are in the proper place to fully explain the facts given - for example, the placement of the citation in the first paragraph of the 'Death and Legacy' section suggests that it's only for the Parkinson's fact, leaving the reader wondering where you got his death date from.

2. Think about the balance of the article, making sure the length and detail of each section corresponds to how important it is for the reader in understanding the life of Emmett. For example, the section 'Doctoral Work and Thesis' is the same length as the 'BET Theory' section, mostly because of the details given about his advisor's work. Even though it has its own article, consider giving the BET section a little more scope in order to give it more weight. Ideally, the length of the sections should provide a very rough visual account of their relative significance to the article. Alternatively, you can achieve a similar weighting effect by adding a relevant image.

3. The ideas to add more pictures and to list his most significant publications (with links) are good ones, and I would encourage both.

Also, please post a comment to the Talk page of the original article explaining that you're drafting a new version of this article for a WikiEducation class, providing a short summary of the changes you've made (dividing it into sections, adding information, etc.) so that when you begin moving this across in a couple of weeks, it won't come as a surprise.

You've received an extra peer review (my mistake); take a look at these and continue to revise in the sandbox (all your old drafts are saved automatically). Again, this article is already in very good shape, so you have the opportunity now to think about verbal and visual ways to guide the reader through the article and make it work on multiple levels. Wikipedia takes all sorts: a quick skimmer should be able to easily identify the most salient points, while someone beginning a research project should be able to use its sources and questions as a springboard for more detailed investigation. Keep up the good work!