Talk:Phase resetting in neurons

Class project 2013

Hi, my name is Dershika Patel and I am working on this topic for a course assignment, BMED 4752 - Neuroscience, at Georgia Tech.

Response: Thank you for the comments everyone! I believe I have now fixed the grammar issues throughout the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dershika Patel (talk • contribs) 04:27, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Article Critique (Applies to Last Version before November 19)

1. Quality of Information: 2

2. Article size: 2

3. Readability: 2

4. Refs: 2

5. Links: 2

6. Responsive to comments: 2

7. Formatting: 1

8. Writing: 2

9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2

10. Outstanding?: 1

Comment-Few errors in referencing and a few formatting errors such as excess brackets can be removed. Apart from that, the article is informative and a really great read.

_______________

Total: 18 out of 20

SindhujaPadmanabhan (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Article Critique (Applies to Last Version before November 19)

1. Quality of Information: 2

2. Article size: 2

3. Readability: 2

4. Refs: 2

5. Links: 2

6. Responsive to comments: 2

7. Formatting: 1

There are a couple of formatting errors or typos. For example, there is a stray bracket/parenthesis before a reference which can be deleted.

8. Writing: 1

In a couple of places an article such as "a" or "the" is missing.
In the last paragraph of the article, it says "due to synchronization within the gamma-frequency range has been shown..." The way this sentence is worded doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2

10. Outstanding?: 2

I think the page is really nicely laid out and informative. I liked that there was a video and pictures. The headings and subheadings made a lot of sense to me.

_______________

Total: 18 out of 20 Grader: Saswat Panda SaswatPanda (talk) 00:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Article Critique (Applies to Last Version before November 19)

1. Quality of Information: 2

2. Article size: 2

3. Readability: 2

4. Refs: 2

5. Links: 2

6. Responsive to comments: 2

7. Formatting: 1

8. Writing: 2

9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2

10. Outstanding?: 2

Total: 19 out of 20

Comments: I love all of the pictures and video! I think it makes this article outstanding. There are some formatting issues (such as spaces needed between some words/parentheses, stray parentheses) which is why I gave the formatting a 1. Besides that, I really like the way the article is formatted because it makes it easy to read and find what you're looking for. The content and overall writing is great. I think just a little bit of fine tuning is needed. Crowen4 (talk) 01:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]