User talk:Chocolatecalorimetry/sandbox

This is me communicating with you through your sandbox talk page to see if this works! The Shabang (talk) 16:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Really cool topic! The review article looks promising. Calhobbs11 (talk) 16:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the review article is very comprehensive of the topic, citing "issues or challenges that need to be overcome." The Shabang (talk) 21:23, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You've got a good plan in wanting to expand the introduction. I'm interested in what further research can be done on the subject. It may help avoid expression of opinion by summarizing the research that "can" be done rather than that "needs to" be done. Keep it up! The Shabang (talk) 22:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I like what you added about the different processes (biotic vs abiotic). Are both approaches equally used or is the abiotic more favorable? I've also heard before that methane absorbs heat much more efficiently than carbon dioxide. For researchers doing electromethanogenesis, do they want to stop at making methane or make larger hydrocarbons with it? Overall, it looks really solid and a good addition to the wiki article. Calhobbs11 (talk) 03:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Calhobbs11, I'll look into those and let you know. Those are great questions! Thank you!Chocolatecalorimetry (talk) 18:13, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shabang, I definitely agree with you about the "can" rather than "needs to" change. I tried to do that. Let me know if I can make it more neutral. Thank you! Chocolatecalorimetry (talk) 18:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think your draft of the "applications" portion included "can" quite well, and it's in a neutral tone, so nice job! A note about the mechanisms section (and the others to a lesser extent), if you end up writing enough content, you may want to create a subheading. The Shabang (talk) 18:50, 16 November 2020 (UTC) Something I forgot to mention: are the in-text citations for each specific addition being documented somewhere besides within the draft itself? I'm just curious so you don't have to scramble later to remember where you sourced the new info from. The Shabang (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@theshabang Thank you! Yes those are being documented and will be included in the final product.Chocolatecalorimetry (talk) 02:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overall I think that your edits can be useful for a First-time user of it. It seems as if you might want to include the applications portion of the article earlier so that people can easily identify the reason or purpose of electomethanogenesis. Maybe you can just mention it in the first paragraph. The edits do seem to flow well to gather and each part seems like a good length. I think you’ve got all the major hyperlinks in wikipedia. One that I think you could add is “reduction” and link it to the “Redox” page. That seems like a fundamental principle in this article. I think later on when you’ve added the appropriate references and an images, you should fit all the criteria for the assignment.Calhobbs11 (talk) 02:10, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Calhobbs11 Thank you!! That's a great idea to include the applications section earlier and to link redox. I'll take a look at those edits. Thank you! Chocolatecalorimetry (talk) 02:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]