User talk:Itufrrr
| This user is a student editor in Concordia_University/HENV_680_Advanced_Seminar_in_Environmental_Science_WINTER2025_(Winter_2025). |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Itufrrr, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Primate foraging draft peer review
[edit]Lead
The topic is clearly described through the first three sentences.
The lead section introduces the following sections that are further elaborated. It is quite concise and well detailed, it might or might not be expanded depending on how many sections will be added.
Content
The content is directly linked to the proposed topic. It breaks down and expands the sections that were introduced in the lead.
One beneficial change could be including the same terminology of the section names taken from the lead paragraph, or in contrast, to modify the section names that could match the ones used in the lead.
As the topic is quite niche, it brings up a critical under-represented space for the discussion of a narrow selection of monkey species in relation to specific survival mechanisms.
Tone and Balance
The content is presented in an unbiased, objective perspective with a proportionate distribution of sections. There are no suggestions or persuasions led by the author.
Sources and References
Apart from the lead, the content seems well referenced. There is a mix of references through time, a few being recent while some others dating back by a bit.
The sources are thorough and relevant to the topic. It's difficult to speak of the diversity of authors in this context, although the links seem to be working well.
Organization
The content is clear, concise and easy to follow. There is only one grammatical and one spelling mistake that have been noted.
The content's structure is well balanced.
Images and Media
The images are complementary to the text and well captioned, although the graph is not as easily understood.
New Article condiserations
The list of sources seems quite expansive, and condenses a range of publications throughout different generations.
The structure is quite similar to other wikipages so it feels familiar to read over. The headings and infoboxes all fit under the popular pattern.
Just for coherence, the 'Energy maximization and minimization' section could fit under the 'Optimal foraging' section.
The content could be slightly developed and perhaps some hyperlinks could be useful to redirect to other external pages (if there would be a need for it)
~
Edited by Eti Issa Eti Issa (talk) 17:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hi Itufrrr. Thank you for your work on Primate foraging. Another editor, Noleander, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Article appears to meet WP notability guidelines, but only has one other article that links to it. Part of creating a new article is finding other, related articles, and creating blue links between the articles. Example: why doesn't the Primate article link to this article?
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Noleander}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)