User talk:Mstev18/River Anticlines

Review of this article-in-progress by Erin

Big changes: There are NO links to other articles in this article. The interconnected nature of Wikipedia is its strength-- this needs to be changed! Your style of writing is too conversational for an informational article. Write as if you are the expert.

Little changes: Using Wiki markup to force a table of contents at the beginning could add structure to this article. This might help you better relate a topic to the next topic you're going to discuss. I would also suggest moving the image up to the top of the article, so you can immediately communicate visually with the reader.

Style suggestions: It needs some spell check; read it out loud to catch them if your word processor didn't. It could also use some grammatical editing to avoid embarrassing apostrophes dropping in wherever they like.

Visual suggestions: The figure is well-made (that is, it gets across the process of producing a river anticline) but it is not properly tagged according to wiki's copyright protocols and it could stand some labeling and uploading in a higher resolution.

Overall, you have a good start. Adding links to other articles and presenting the most professional article you can will help you get the rest of the way there. Cheers! Ewalde1 (talk) 00:10, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Review of rough draft by Marielle

Overall...

The organization of the wiki page is not the standard type I usually see and is probably preferred. You have only one main heading with 4 subheadings. I would change the organization of the article to reflect the typical article. You also didn't link any of your words (I forgot to too so no worries). You also could use some more line references. Remember: a good wiki article has almost every line referenced.

Introduction

• Maybe you could include a simple diagram showing what an anticline is versus a syncline. Its easy for us to understand as geologists but a diagram could go a long way for the average layperson.
• You could explain why erosion is so great in large orogens like the Himalayas and Andes. Also, you misspelled Andes... It's not the Andies (that is a very yummy chocolate mint candy!)
• You have several other grammatical errors throughout the article. Remember to capitalize a word after a period. You also have random periods in the middle of sentences.
• You need to rework the sentence, "River anticlines can provide valuable information to one who know what to look for". The sentence is a little rough sounding.
• Sometimes your tone is a little too casual for an encyclopedia article. For example, "wondering geologist".

Isososy

You misspelled this word. It needs an "A"

Overall... really good article. Your biggest problem is grammar and formatting. The content is there which is the hard part so everything else should be a quick fix.

Taylor Berlin Critique

If you could add one more figure, add hyperlinks to other pages and have more lines cited — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tberli3 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

comments by Graeme

• Make your section heading using the double equals like this: ==Isostasy== (I won't add to the humour by spelling it a fourth way).
• For Author's names in references they should not be in all CAPITALS. When you have two reference the same use name= parameter on the ref tag so that you don't have to repeat the whole thing.
• Are there more examples?
• Is their any mathematical modelling?
• What is the limit to the process?
• The diagram could do with less white space around it. I made more comments on your talk page for this diagram.
• Who discovered river anticlines and how did they do so?
• There really does need to be more Wikilinks.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:54, 25 October 2011 (UTC)