Talk:Obesogenic environment: Difference between revisions
imported>Gareth Leng No edit summary |
imported>Gareth Leng No edit summary |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Your summaries are good - you can write fluently and grasp the essence - but remember that the most important thing to capture, for any paper, is not what the authors ''think'' but what the ''evidence'' actually is. Any good article must show the evidence behind the conclusions.[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 20:14, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | Your summaries are good - you can write fluently and grasp the essence - but remember that the most important thing to capture, for any paper, is not what the authors ''think'' but what the ''evidence'' actually is. Any good article must show the evidence behind the conclusions.[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 20:14, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | ||
Good work so far on the article - you're identifying questions in a logically structured way and pucking out key pieces of evidence from strong sources. Be careful to say enough about the evidence to display what the evidence actually shows rather than simply asserting that there is evidence and citing a paper - some details are critical, such as whether these are human studies or studies in rats, and the kind of studies that they are; they may need a little more explanation to make it very clear what the nature of the evidence is. Don't go overboard on this, a few key phrases is all that may be needed.[[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 10:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:33, 26 October 2011
Callum Bateman 17:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC) Amy Douglas 18:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC) Helen Martin 18:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Good pick of papers Helen!Gareth Leng 13:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Callum, I moved the 2 refs you added into the Bibliography page. Nancy Sabatier 12:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)-
Your summaries are good - you can write fluently and grasp the essence - but remember that the most important thing to capture, for any paper, is not what the authors think but what the evidence actually is. Any good article must show the evidence behind the conclusions.Gareth Leng 20:14, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Good work so far on the article - you're identifying questions in a logically structured way and pucking out key pieces of evidence from strong sources. Be careful to say enough about the evidence to display what the evidence actually shows rather than simply asserting that there is evidence and citing a paper - some details are critical, such as whether these are human studies or studies in rats, and the kind of studies that they are; they may need a little more explanation to make it very clear what the nature of the evidence is. Don't go overboard on this, a few key phrases is all that may be needed.Gareth Leng 10:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- Article with Definition
- Biology Category Check
- Health Sciences Category Check
- Eduzendium Category Check
- Stub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Biology Stub Articles
- Biology Internal Articles
- Health Sciences Stub Articles
- Health Sciences Internal Articles
- Eduzendium Stub Articles
- Eduzendium Internal Articles
- Biology Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Health Sciences Underlinked Articles
- Eduzendium Underlinked Articles