Talk:Distancing (psychology)
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Currently[edit]
 | This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2013 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Georgia Institute of Technology/Introduction to Neuroscience (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki. |
Peer Review 1[edit]
1. Quality of Information: 2 Solid information, well referenced.
2. Article size: 2 - Meets requirement set by Dr. Potter.
3. Readability: 2 - Worded in terms such that a layperson would understand.
4. Refs: 2 - Meets minimum requirement set by Dr. Potter
5. Links: 2 - Links to other Wikipedia articles are adequate.
6. Responsive to comments: 2 - No comments are present.
7. Formatting: 2 - Arranged in sensible order.
8. Writing: 2 - Well written.
9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2 - Real name was used as user account.
10. Outstanding?: 2 - Neat topic that is well referenced :)
Total: 20/20
Skarthikeyan3 (talk) 03:41, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Peer Review 2[edit]
1. Factual and Encyclopedic Information: 2 - Well referenced and up to date information
2. Length: 2 - Within the set limit
3. Readable: 2 - Easy to read and follow
4. References: 2 - at least 10 references
5. Links: 2 - adequately linked to other pages
6. Talk Page: 2 - There were no comments to respond to
7. Formatting: 1 - Well formatted, but I feel that there needs to be more information on what type of children have to go through distancing
8. Writing: 2 - well written, well researched, verifiable, good grammar
9. Used real name: 2
10. Outstanding: 2 - interesting article that was easy to read
Total: 19/20
Mahwish Khan (talk) 02:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Peer Review 3[edit]
1. Quality of Information: 2 - Both abundant and clear
2. Article Size: 2
3. Readability: 2 - Very easy to understand. The ideas are explained in a clear and compact way.
4. References: 2
5. Links: 2 - Lots of interesting related topics
6. Responsiveness: 2
7. Formatting: 2 - Organized and doesn't feel like a block of text. Capitalize headings/subheadings?
8. Writing: 2 - Very well written.
9. Real Name: 2
10. Outstanding: 2 - I see this as a gold standard for what wikipedia pages should look like. 10/10 would read again.
Total: 20/20 - But seriously that was immaculate.
Rkasinadhuni3 (talk) 23:01, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
- Response: All children experience distancing, it is a part of normal development. Headings should also be in lowercase letters unless they are proper nouns. JahedaK (talk) 8 December 2013 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
