 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Since your article is about a specific study the first thing you should do is reference the study. RJBazell ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:39, 6 November 2017 (UTC) But that is a quibble it looks like you are making a good start toward your first draft RJBazell ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
I think your article is very well written! It definitely stays factual and doesn't show any personal bias/etc. To add more to your article, I think you could expand more on the impact of the study and how it caused a response from the tobacco companies as more evidence built up. You could also expand on the previous ideas of what caused cancer and how this study confirmed that smoking is strongly linked to cancer. Eqw55 ( talk) 18:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Really good article! One thing I would suggest is to include more links to other Wikipedia articles within your article, such as for case control study, in case people don't understand, because there are quite a few medical terms brought up in the article. When you say "bronchiogenic carcinoma" in the first paragraph for example, maybe specify that this is lung cancer in case people don't know. Also, maybe expand on the impact of this study and how it affected the public at large and the tobacco companies. Bunnydew15 ( talk) 19:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Overall, I think your article is extremely well organized and is easy to read. One suggestion I would make is just to add more historical context the "Purpose" section of the article. As of now, it's a bit bare bones, and we've discussed A LOT of historical context for the study in class. Additionally, the "Impact" section of the article could potentially be broken down into two categories: impacts in the scientific community (relating to future studies, both about tobacco and about other carcinogens) and societal impacts, which you seem to have already covered. ( Iimph2017 ( talk) 15:56, 14 November 2017 (UTC))
|
| This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Since your article is about a specific study the first thing you should do is reference the study. RJBazell ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:39, 6 November 2017 (UTC) But that is a quibble it looks like you are making a good start toward your first draft RJBazell ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
I think your article is very well written! It definitely stays factual and doesn't show any personal bias/etc. To add more to your article, I think you could expand more on the impact of the study and how it caused a response from the tobacco companies as more evidence built up. You could also expand on the previous ideas of what caused cancer and how this study confirmed that smoking is strongly linked to cancer. Eqw55 ( talk) 18:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Really good article! One thing I would suggest is to include more links to other Wikipedia articles within your article, such as for case control study, in case people don't understand, because there are quite a few medical terms brought up in the article. When you say "bronchiogenic carcinoma" in the first paragraph for example, maybe specify that this is lung cancer in case people don't know. Also, maybe expand on the impact of this study and how it affected the public at large and the tobacco companies. Bunnydew15 ( talk) 19:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Overall, I think your article is extremely well organized and is easy to read. One suggestion I would make is just to add more historical context the "Purpose" section of the article. As of now, it's a bit bare bones, and we've discussed A LOT of historical context for the study in class. Additionally, the "Impact" section of the article could potentially be broken down into two categories: impacts in the scientific community (relating to future studies, both about tobacco and about other carcinogens) and societal impacts, which you seem to have already covered. ( Iimph2017 ( talk) 15:56, 14 November 2017 (UTC))