Talk:Aquatic biomonitoring

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 September 2020 and 15 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ziggy Marmot.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2021 and 11 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Marythemuffinlady. Peer reviewers: Goobglorp, FreyaPortales97.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mmericle27.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Biomonitoring restructuring project
Over the past few months I spent a good deal of time working to improve an article that was once called Biomonitoring (chemistry); that can be found at Biomonitoring, which is what this article was once called. This decision was arrived upon after some discussion with User:Shootbamboo. See the (full discussion here). As a note of disclosure for anyone who reviews these articles, the subject matter of that article is of interest to the American Chemistry Council (ACC), which is a client of my employer, although my editorial decisions were mine alone. This article is not of interest to them and beyond the move I have only edited it slightly in any case. And I look forward to continuing to improve Wikipedia's articles in this subject area. Cheers, NMS Bill (talk) 18:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Additions to the Article
I plan on adding the different types of methods used to monitor aquatic conditions such as qualitative, semi-quantitative, or quantitative methods. I also plan on researching and adding why aquatic biomonitoring is so important for the environment and why it is important to know what the changes are in species that live in aquatic conditions. I also would like to add where the most changes have occurred in aquatic conditions and how those changes have affected the overall environment. These changes will include extinction of some aquatic species and the rise of new aquatic conditions and how each of these factors have affected their surrounding environments.

Why Biological Monitoring? (n.d.). Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://www.maine.gov/dep/water/monitoring/biomonitoring/why.htm

Department of Environmental Conservation. (n.d.). Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/23847.html

@. (n.d.). Aquatic Biomonitoring ~ Mainspring Conservation Trust. Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://www.mainspringconserves.org/what-we-do/aquatic-monitoring/

Mmericle27 (talk) 12:48, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aquatic biomonitoring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150704182355/http://www.jnabs.org/doi/pdf/10.1899/09-178.1 to http://www.jnabs.org/doi/pdf/10.1899/09-178.1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Editing proposal (Updated November 2020)
(October 2020) Hello Folks, I am hoping to expand a bit on the existing article. A couple of areas are noted as "needs clarification", I hope to provide that. As well as, bring in a couple more sections to discuss the various methods, and indicator species used in aquatic biomonitoring. I'll update this proposal as I work through the article. Don't hesitate to let me know if you have any suggestions or plans for it. BestZiggy Marmot (talk) 17:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

(November 15, 2020) So the "final edits" have been posted. Most of the meat was just reorganized or clarified. I did manage to lose that nifty table that was at the bottom of the article..oops. My apologies to whoever built that. thoughts from fellow editors? ````

Wiki Education assignment: ERTH 4303 Resources of the Earth
— Assignment last updated by ChloejWard (talk) 03:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC) Peer-reviewed Aquatic biomonitoring

Clarity The article is well-written and easy to follow. The lead section captures the readers attention and provides relevant information without being overall detailed. There are no significant grammatical errors or overly advanced jargon. The author offers a variety of different images to enhance readers' overall understanding. The photos that are included are well-captured and clearly captioned. The content provides a clear picture of the field of aquatic biomonitoring relative to the scope of the article. My suggestion to improve clarity is to outline clearly what will be discussed in the article with the lead section.

Structure: The article follows a logical flow of information and provides a clear structure for readers. I appreciate how the author started with this monitoring technique's purpose then followed with methods and variables to consider. I appreciate how the author briefly introduced sections on methods and purpose. In order to achieve that level of structure throughout the article, I would include introductions to sections of variable and indicator species.

Neutrality The author does an excellent job of keeping a neutral tone and does not lead readers to a particular perspective. The author does a great job of providing information from various resources from peer-reviewed journals. To improve overall all neutrality, I would encourage the author also to include more references from governmental organizations or community-driven news outlets to capture a variety of different perspectives and knowledge on the topic.

Balanced coverage The article provides an insightful overview of the topic. The author does not try to convince or persuade the audience into a particle way of thinking. The author does a great job highlighting the relevant aspects of the subject without favouring a particle section. In order to encapture a multitude of different perspectives on this topic, I would include a section on the drawbacks and limits to this type of monitoring technique or how it compares to other forms of monitoring. This would provide readers with a more well-informed picture of the topic.

References The authors provide updated and relevant peer-reviewed sources. The author utilized a multitude of sources for each topic. Every topic discussed has a clearly cited reference. The references are easily accessed. The references included in the article are properly represented. The only thing I would do to improve the reference section is to have more sources from non-peer-reviewd journals in order to provide a more diverse perspective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristen112211 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)