User talk:CuriousGeorge16/sandbox
What does the article (or section) do well? Wow! Talk about detail. You have written a very thorough article that goes into multiple aspects about the topic. Each area is discussed well and you include plenty of details for readers to understand what the McKenzie Method is.
What changes would you suggest overall? Perhaps a picture of somebody who is demonstrating the McKenzie method would be a good addition.
What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution?I think a background section on Dr. McKenzie that goes a little deeper than the "History" section you have now would be beneficial. Something that would touch on his education, how he became interested in spinal medicine, and how the method has changed throughout the years. Or maybe even link to Dr. McKenzie's personal Wiki page (if there is one!).
Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own? If so, let him/her know! Detail, detail, detail! After reading your article, I want to go back to my Wiki and ensure that I incorporate the same level of detail into my article. Schmids (talk) 07:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
What does the article (or section) do well? This article has a lot of information and is very in depth. I really appreciate how you broke the assessment down into different sections as well.
What changes would you suggest overall? I'm not sure what the popularity section is intending to say? Perhaps you meant to come back to that sections?
What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution?I As Scott mentioned I think it would be great if you could establish McKenzie's credibility by providing some more information about him!
Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own? If so, let him/her know! I definitely would like to re-read my article and see if there are any places that can use the same amount of detail. LakshmiMod (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2017 (UTC)