Talk:Predation risk allocation hypothesis
Add topic | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]Thank you for the suggestions for my article! These will be really helpful for developing the article into the final draft. Nlstudent18 (talk) 20:53, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nlstudent18. Peer reviewers: AlexandraHayward, Mattdrodge.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Peer Review
[edit]Nice work! Your article seems well-researched. I like that you included examples of research satisfying the hypothesis in addition to research that doesn’t— it’s a good balance, and you maintain a very neutral tone.
I have a few suggestions or points to consider:
Lead paragraph
- The second sentence might be a bit redundant
- I was a bit confused as to whether the hypothesis was about animals in situations where they might be prey or situations where they might predate, maybe you could explain the hypothesis a bit more clearly
- When you say “effectiveness is mixed,” I’m not sure if this is clear as to whether there are mixed results or mixed opinions among scientists
- I’m not sure if Wiki articles should typically refer to “the article” in a transition statement
Hypothesis section
- It’s not clear what the second prediction is
- Maybe you could elaborate on why the model doesn’t work for certain animals— how come some animals know the risk while others don’t?
- In general, I think it would help to elaborate more. How can animals respond to more predators without being aware of the risk?
Effectiveness section
- Maybe you should specify the species that the research was focussed on (ex. Do all snails fit the hypothesis?)
- Elaborate (especially the fish example)
- Some pictures would be nice here
Conclusion
- I’m not sure Wiki articles typically have conclusions
- Is the perceived need for research determining the usefulness of the hypothesis your opinion? Or the general consensus in the scientific community? Or the conclusion of a couple scientists?
Overall, it mostly seems like you just need to elaborate a bit more on different points to make them clear. Otherwise, well done. AlexandraHayward (talk) 01:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)