 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ckambd, Rooner21, RamakrishnaJB, Aale0202.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignmentbyPrimeBOT (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Peer Review - Steven
The article as a whole is fantastic. Its very well sourced, informative, and is written in a neutral tone.
A few things I noticed could be improved
1. The introduction could include a short summary on the methods included in the article, just in the first paragraph. The factors that affect the counts themselves could be mentioned in the next one - I think the introduction flows much better that way.
2. More links to already existing articles, especially under the FACS section. A lot of the enumeration process is already described under the main article for flow cytometry.
3. Better explain how bacterioplankton counting is related to measures of productivityand marine seasonal successsion dynamics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stvnlee94 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! It's Maddy. Here's my peer review:
1. Great intro. Well done making it easy to understand. 2. Wikipedia itself recommends linking your article to other articles so that could be a great addition to your page. 3. "For determining environmental changes, especially extremes" elaborating on this topic may be beneficial 4. You all have created a great list of references and at a quick glance I didn't see an redundancy which was awesome! 5. We may know what enumeration means, but perhaps consider either defining it or linking the term to a definition. 6. I added a couple links, one of which was in the staining section (feel free to remove it).
Overall, I think you all did a great job. Your page is well organized and well written. If I had to give any advice it would be to add a few more links for jargon and if you are able to, add images. Just shout if I can help with anything else or if you all need someone to peer-review it again. Well done!! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maddyy.h (talk • contribs) 03:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Peer Review - Rosie - Introduction is concise. It is brief, you could summarize the article a bit more by introducing the counting methods that are outlined. - Could also add a short section at the beginning about history of the techniques: when and by who they were developed by, how they've changed over time - Measures of Productivity: could discuss advantages of leucine incorporation over thymidine Really great article overall! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosiesav (talk • contribs) 03:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Peer review-Mingyi Overall, this is a well-organized paper with detailed information. I think it is a great start and I enjoy reading it. (Could add some background information in somewhere,e.g the inventor if each method)
Intro- good key information,concise! However, since this page is about counting methods, maybe you should briefly summarize/mention these methods in the intro. Or you can just move the last paragraph in Uses to the intro. Uses-I like how you use point form, make it easy to follow. Can be a little more detailed about the applications, such as how it can be used to determine environmental changes. Epifluorescence microscopy-Some terminology can be better explained, such as enumeration, or link it to explanatory articles. Flow Cytometry-This section can be organized better, especially the part before the 'Enumeration Process'. Measures of productivity-This section is very clear. Could add a comparison between these measurements. Marine seasonal succession dynamics-The link between this section and counting method is not very clear. Maybe change the heading name and related it directly with counting so the readers can know how they related. Well done! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mingyi233 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
