User talk:Cavanbgon/sandbox
Peer Review
[edit]Since the peer review link leads directly into the wikipedia page, and your personal sandbox also mirrors it, I presume the page is your work and will comment on it as a whole. While "Properties of Indian Writing Systems" is sourced, the (top) section is not, and I would greatly recommend finding sources for these paragraphs if you can. The content in question seems appropriately neutral. I am unsure on the amount of data and resources out there on this topic, so while I am inclined to say that the information provided could be elaborated upon or added to, I will only say that if further information cannot be found, a new section discussing the implications of OCR, or perhaps how extensively it's used would serve to expand the page nicely.
In "Properties of Indian Writing Systems", I think tying the first paragraph to the latter ones, whether through a smoother transition or the merging of paragraphs, would clarify the significance of your comment on the 22 languages of India beyond languages that can be written with the same script. Other than these suggestions, the article seems complete. Energy2048 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Noah B -- Peer Review
[edit]I liked this, and from what I’ve read about Wolfram’s ideas, this seems accurate! A few things to note, though: 1) this should be separated into parts (i.e. critiques section), 2) could be written a little more for a general audience/ more in the typical wiki style - not that its not written well (it is!)), but there is a standard style and this seems distinct from it, 3) missing links (i.e. Scott Aaronson -who I love- has a wiki which is not linked, link 12 doesn’t talk about race or gender but you imply that it does(?) - maybe you’re missing a link). Otherwise, I think it’s great, and I think Peter’s comments are also helpful! Noah48841 (talk) 03:13, 29 May 2025 (UTC)