User talk:Psun23/sandbox/Dandelion coffee

Hi @Psun23:, I took a look at your progress on your article so far. It seems like you're off to a good start! You've added about 1.5 paragraphs of text and a reference to the Encyclopedia of Herbal Health. This seems like a pretty reliable source for information about herbal remedies like the subject of the article. I noticed that some other claims in the article link to sources that may be less reliable (i.e., nutrinet). I wonder if the encyclopedia you find can also support those claims.

I'm trying to think of some other ideas about ways you might improve your article. My guess is that the easiest place to start might be the history section, which has a couple brief citations surrounding the origins of the coffee. I wonder if you might be able to flesh this out with more contemporary history as natural remedies and herbal medicine have broader appeal now. I also wonder if you might find any information about health risks or questions of the efficacy of the remedy. This might help your article have a WP:NPOV.

Finally, I think it's often useful to look at articles on related topics or similar kinds of subjects for inspiration and sources. I wonder if any sources on dandilion might be useful. I'm really excited to see how your article continues to develop!

Groceryheist (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Round 2 Feedback

Greetings @Psun23:. It's great to see more good work on your article. You've received some peer reviews from Thaonguyen050300 link and Pjuan8 (link. I strongly encourage you to take a careful look at their feedback as you continue to improve your article. I want to highlight a few of their ideas that I strongly agree with.

Pjuan8 suggests expanding the lead so that it better represents what's included in the article after your additions.

Thaonguyen050300 suggests new information that you might add like the origin of the name, or about the 'taraxacin' compound. These seem like good ideas. While adding more content is always great, I do think you've done a decent job of adding information by expanding multiple sections of the article and adding a new one. She also suggests improving the organization of the article. I think that this has more to do with the writing style and adding more "connective tissue" that weaves different paragraphs and subsections together.

As you get closer to being ready to publish your changes, I suggest you take a look at my page on polishing your article for ideas for your next round of work on this project. I especially think that doing things like adding wikilinks, "also see" links, categories, and external links are good things to do when polishing an article. I also suggest that you spend some time carefully copyediting the information you've already added to make it as easy to read as possible while maintaining an wp:encyclopedic tone.

Nice job so far. I'm looking forward to seeing this article when you get closer to being done with it! Reach out to me when you're ready for more feedback or you think it's ready to be published in the mainspace.

Groceryheist (talk) 01:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@Groceryheist: Hi Nate, Thank you for the feedback! I'm working on implementing your suggestions. I did wonder how relevant you found my peer reviews to be for my final draft as they didn't review my actual sandbox draft. I tried reaching out a few days back, but they both gave me feedback on the current article with no changes from myself.