User talk:Lang1803

Welcome!

Hello, Lang1803, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Elysia 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
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:57, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Katherine! Great job on your article. You make peer review very easy. I did not find anything major to recommend that you might change. I did put a few comments in your article. One small recommendation that I mentioned was to consider including a visual in the positive and negative relationships between richness and homogenization. You do a very nice job of clearly explaining these concepts, but a visual might help certain readers understand it more clearly. I am very happy that I was assigned your article for peer review. After reviewing your article I feel that I now am better prepared to improve my own article. Thank you for the great example of high quality work. Your article was very well organized, very concise, and already very nicely polished. You should be very happy with your work!--Plumbob200 (talk) 17:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

peer review

Katherine,

 Great paper overall. The sections were very thought out and flowed very well. There isn't much I would change honestly. You could add some of your sections together if you wanted to but the way you have them laid out also makes sense. The example section of your paper is very interesting and helpful and I'm glad you included it. There were no grammatical errors that I found and it was revised nicely already. Your paper was very well written, easy to understand and organized nicely. Great Job!!  

Whouse141 (talk) 02:35, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Christie Peer Review

Hey Kathrine! Your article was really thorough and a pleasure to read. I liked your organization and the way you broke down the concept. Overall I really liked it and learned a lot. I don’t even know what things I would recommend you change to be honest. I think it was super impressive and a great example of a wikipedia article. ChristieBirdsong (talk) 09:18, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review - Mosbey

Katherine,

Great job with this article. There were many questions I had about the topic that I had in my head before I started reading it and you answered all of them. I thought you did an excellent job of organizing the article from broad down to the specific examples with the varying taxonomic groups. Presenting the specific examples of taxonomic groups helps everyday readers understand how biotic homogenization affects organisms they may see everyday. I posted a one comment that I believe requires additional information, but other than that, I wouldn't change anything. Impressive job! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmosbey17 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Peer review review

Hi Katherine! Great job! I agree with the reviewers that you have taken a complex topic and broken it down nicely. Your article is well-written, well-organized and comprehensive. Your generous use of examples makes the topic much easier to understand. It seems to me as though your article fits the Wikipedia guidelines, and I think it will make a great addition. There were a few suggestions in the specific comments section you can take a look at and decide if you want to include it or not. Also, some of your subsections (where you had the topics in bold at the top, but the subsections where in a smaller font) were a little hard to distinguish from section headers. You could see if there is a better way to format that. But mostly I think your article is complete. You have a good number of references, and already have links. Really nice job! Advevol (talk) 16:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Response to Peer Review

Thank you everyone for your input! I made a couple edits based on the suggestions. Someone recommended that I go into more detail on how allele frequencies are analyzed in genetic homogenization, which I did. Another recommendation was that I put in a figure illustrating the positive and negative relationships between homogenization and richness, which I agreed with. I made a figure, however, it wasn't accepted when I tried to upload it, so I think I will probably just leave that out. I also went into more detail in the section on conservation as suggested. I did not make any adjustments to formatting. While I agree that the sub-subheaders are hard to distinguish from the subheaders, those are the formatting generated by wikipedia and I don't think I can really adjust it. It was also recommended that I consolidate the section examining the relationships between homogenization and richness into a single section, but I decided to leave it the way I had it because I think it is easier to read if it is in smaller chunks. Lang1803 (talk) 21:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your hard work creating Biotic homogenization! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:08, 20 June 2019 (UTC)