Hi, I left some feedback for your sandbox here! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:35, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Elysia (Wiki Ed), Hi Elysia, thanks for the previous feedback! My second article is ready for review too. Two sections (the lead and "animal embryos") are live already on the Embryo article, and I also have material in my sandbox ("plant embryos" section, which I think is mostly finished, and the "research & technology" section, which I restructured but have not addressed content for yet). Thanks again! Yul B. Allwright (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
I especially appreciate your changes to the lead paragraph of Embryo. I felt like it was pretty technical before but is now much more intelligible to a general audience.
I love seeing all the citations! All the content looks really well supported. This is an especially nice change to the previous version where those multiple paragraphs had no citations whatsoever.
Ultimately I am really happy with your changes thus far to Embryo--a stance that appears to be echoed, given that your edits have not been tweaked/revised in any way by other members of the community
As far as the content in your sandbox about plant embryos and research/technology
Missing citations in the second-to-last paragraph for plant embryo
Your levels are a little off in the Research and technology section. I find this easiest to fix in editing source. If you have a section that is a level two heading (like "Research and technology"), then it should be subdivided into level three headings (you have subdivided it into level six headings). So instead of 6 "=" before and after the subsection title, it should be 3 (you'll see what I mean when you look at the wikicode).
The ART section ends without a citation
"See also" and "main" templates should both be at the very top of a section. In the ART section, you have the "See also" template at the bottom.
Some of the content in the ART section does not necessarily seem within the scope of the section. The content about miscarriage and abortion could have a clearer link to the development of assisted reproductive technologies.
Nicely done overall! As always, let me know if you have any questions. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:16, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Elysia (Wiki Ed), thank you so much! Yes I still have quite a bit of work for the Research and technology section, so thank you for the feedback so I can see what to focus on fixing first. I'm guessing I'll want to ask you for another round of feedback once I finish a full draft of that section because it seems like it will be the most challenging one to tackle. Thanks again! Yul B. Allwright (talk) 20:08, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Started a Wikiproject on Science Policy
Hi Yul B. Allwright, I just wanted to let you know that the Wikiproject for Science Policy has been officially created! Thanks for showing your interest in the Science Policy Wikiproject proposal page. It's still a little bare, but with your assistance, I believe that we can make it real nice. I started it based off of the template suggested in the Wikiproject, so any edits are always welcome. I could use help with developing our first goals as well, so any suggestions are welcome! Also, if you're interested in being a participant, please list yourself in the Wikiproject homepage under the section for participants. Lightning1115 (talk) 03:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
And since no one challenged his edit at the time he now considers it a consensus and refuses to revert back to old (and most importantely real) figures.
He refuses to debate my argument therefore I solicit your input into this.
