Talk:Amazon Venture oil spill/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 15:32, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Reading now. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 15:32, 13 January 2022 (UTC) , just wanted to reach out and say that I have made some edits to the page to address your review. Thank you for beginning this review, and if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns regarding the article, please let me know. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 20:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * in the piping system of the MV Amazon Venture – maybe make clear that this is a ship; that was not clear to me.
 * Added "oil tanker" to clarify that it is a ship.
 * 100,000 US gallons (380,000 l) naturally evaporated – what does this mean, oil can't possibly evaporate?
 * The reference for this statement, Page 58 of this report, has Dr. Jacqui Michel of the Research Planning Institute stating, "To answer the question where the oil went, we estimated an oil budget, with about 150,000 gallons recovered, 50,000 to 100,000 gallons evaporated; 150,000 were calculated to be on the shoreline vegetation, leaving around 100,000 to 150,000 gallons unaccounted for." Also, per Page 2 of this CDC Public Health Statement, "All fuel oils are liquids at room temperature, although they can evaporate."
 * volatilization, evaporation – this should be the same, so use the same term? And link? Unfortunately we don't seem to have an specialized article on oil evaporation …
 * Changed term to maintain consistency with earlier usage of the word "evaporation".
 * On April 6, 1987, the United States House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries held a hearing in Savannah – anything about the reasons for this hearing and the outcome? Any context?
 * Added context on the reason for the hearing. Unfortunately, in my research for this article I did not find any information regarding the outcome of the hearing.
 * sheen from the oil was present 10 miles (16 km) upriver – how did it get there, because of the tides?
 * Added and cited information on how the tides and the current carried the oil both upstream and downstream.
 * This source here lists some central endangered species that were of concern. Maybe worth adding those, because "some endangered species" is a bit unspecific.
 * Listed the five endangered species that inhabited the refuge, as listed in Page 52 of this source. Additionally, added Natural Resources Journal to further reading.
 * Very good, and important, article, thank you. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, looks good, promoting now! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)