User:Graycake/sandbox: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org sandbox}} |
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org sandbox}} |
||
The [[regulatory economics]] article is lacking citation in several sections. Furthermore, some sections seem to ramble without clear breaks between concepts. The article cites some real world examples of regulatory policy, but examples focus on the mid 19th century. The article may become more appealing to readers if some updated examples were given under a new section ("Examples of regulation in modern US policy", for example). The author of this article seems to favor deregulation, as seen in the section titled "Controversy". The author expounds on opponents of regulation in greater detail than on proponents. I would like our group to improve this article by providing updated examples, creating more structure within the article, and edit/improve sections that show evidence of bias. |
|||
The distinction between [[perennial stream|intermittent and ephemeral streams]] is the duration of wet periods.<ref> </ref> |
|||
==notes== |
==notes== |
||
Revision as of 22:04, 13 February 2017
 | This is a user sandbox of Graycake. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the sandbox where you should draft your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. To find the right sandbox for your assignment, visit your Dashboard course page and follow the Sandbox Draft link for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
The regulatory economics article is lacking citation in several sections. Furthermore, some sections seem to ramble without clear breaks between concepts. The article cites some real world examples of regulatory policy, but examples focus on the mid 19th century. The article may become more appealing to readers if some updated examples were given under a new section ("Examples of regulation in modern US policy", for example). The author of this article seems to favor deregulation, as seen in the section titled "Controversy". The author expounds on opponents of regulation in greater detail than on proponents. I would like our group to improve this article by providing updated examples, creating more structure within the article, and edit/improve sections that show evidence of bias.