Average Scores From The Three Sets of Votes:
Accuracy 13.66/15
Comprehensibility 13/15
Formatting 3.5/5
Citations 3.16/5
Summary of (some of the) Comments By Reviewers: Good and informative post. Formatting needs a bit of work, too much boldface/large text. Citations could be better organized.
My personal suggestion: Take a look at the post submitted by @vir and how he handled citing the material. That makes everything so easy to access and made it really easy for me to read a bit more into things.
To be honest, @vir crafted a better organized and cited post then I have ever done, even I am going to be using that one as a reference going forward.
If only I could show my tenth grade english teacher what you wrote about me. Take that Mr. Karcher!
For those curious, this is the code I use to create my citation links:
<sup>[[1]](https://www.nasa.gov/)</sup>And I think you do a great job on your posts @justtryme90! Even better, you have so many interesting topics you write about.
I appreciate the compliment, will use your citation code for my future posts, and thank you for showing me what a great post looks like! :)
Thank you @vir, I look forward to your next post!
Congrats @vir !
Concerning the citations actually I did a similar thing but with additional square brackets like in your citations it looks even better (not so hidden in the text) indeed.
That feedback about citations is really helpful. I've been reluctant to even fool with any "real science" posts, just because citations seem like they would be off-putting to include in journal form. Did you actually check each citation to determine accuracy, though? It seems like that would be a lot of effort for judging. And it would be easy to cite "alt facts" when a cite to a poor source looks like a legitimate citation (just a superscript numeral). Should we list the cited sources at the end of the article, so at least folks can see whether those sources have any credibility. No knock on the post by @vir at all, not at all. Just a process question for future posts. Thanks.
We did the best we could with that regard. Did I read every cited article in detail? No. Did I look at the cited material? Yes. And yeah judging took me quite a few hours (which is a lot for only 13 posts.) :)
I was lenient with "accuracy" to mean accurate to the citations. I thought these posts were all pretty good in the accuracy department.
I have put together a new post for today where I used vir's method and also included a list at the end for exactly your reason. Ease of seeing what the citation is, at the same time as placing the material in the text like vir did so it's right there in a professional manner.
I was definitely empathizing with your challenge in the SteemSTEM curation and contest judging! Having that list will make it easier to see if a reference is to some Alex Jones-type stuff or something more legitimate.
Oh for sure! Appreciate the feedback. I will take a look at that post.
The citation was indeed the common issue with many posts. Thank you for participating!
Thanks for the feedback. Impressed with this contest
No problem, yeah we ended up holding back posting everyone's scores. The scores should IMO be private unless requested like you did. All participants should come and discuss them with us in the #steemSTEM room on steemit.chat, unless they want the scores revealed in public in the open. That way we could further keep things private by direct messaging each person with the info.