Talk:Pea shoots

Rohan Peer review

*What does the article (or section) do well?

• The scientific classification box at the beginning is helpful and makes it look professional
• Good job explaining what pea shoots actually are. I had no idea they were just the tips of pea plants
• Good use of sources + Plenty of sources
• Good job including different language names since that's really helpful for readers
• Solid citations throughout most of the article
• Covers the basics of what it is, how to use it, where it comes from pretty well
• The section structure makes sense and is easy to follow

*What changes would you suggest overall?

• The lead section should be longer and summarize the whole article better.
• Could use more specific examples of dishes they're used in instead of just saying "Chinese and Thai dishes"

*What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution?

• Include more information because it’s still incomplete.
• The lead section should be longer and summarize the whole article better.

*Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own?

If so, let him/her know!

• The way they thought about including different language names shows good consideration for Wikipedia's global audience.
• I should remember that Wikipedia articles need to work for readers from different backgrounds and countries.

Cykl0psPr1me (talk) 13:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Benji Peer Review

*What does the article (or section) do well?

• Inclusion of image of Pea Shoots
• Use of original language in which the plant is originated from, not just English
• You begin with accurate botanical classification, which helps readers place dou miao in a broader plant taxonomy.
• Effectively ties dou miao’s use to specific cultures that shows the ingredient's rising popularity in the West, providing cross-cultural relevance.
• You offer helpful physical and developmental details, such as shoot length, leaf types, and flavor characteristics.

*What changes would you suggest overall?

• Should Include more content for the introduction
• In the ‘Names’ section, there could be more added to give information about the history of how the names originated
• Not completed all the sections within the wiki topic
• More detail or historical citation would improve educational value.
• Smooth transitions between culinary, botanical, and historical sections would help cohesion.
• Order of content needs rethinking
  • Bit strange to have history right at the bottom and not towards the top. Would be best between ‘Names’ and ‘Culinary Uses’

*What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution?

• Need to finish off adding in all the content for the wiki article

*Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own? If so, let him/her know!

• Your section on naming conventions was insightful. It reminded me how important it is to acknowledge multiple terms across regions

BLeoAlwis (talk) 09:46, 2 June 2025 (UTC)