Talk:Grassland degradation

Untitled section
I made this article because I thought it is an essential problem that more people should know about. Grassland degradation is seriously impacting China's grassland, people, and economy. Spreading the knowledge about this topic may contribute to curbing its present damages and preventing further outbeaks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schmidt1510 (talk • contribs) 19:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC) TO THE NEXT PERSON EDITING: I went in and changed some things grammatically and structurally. Go to the history to view his original document and make grammar corrections and such on that.

Feedback
Because you are making a new page (I'm assuming), you should try to define grassland degradation a bit more in the opening paragraph. Why do I care about it and want to keep reading? What are the specifics of grassland degradation i.e. is the grass dead, brown, green, sparse? Where does it mainly occur (countries) and how frequently (statistics)? Although not necessary, I think a picture of grassland degradation would add in a quite literally illustrative element to the article.

Clear, logical organization and structure
The writing is clear and the organization makes sense;it flows and is concise. It is easy to read and understand. Each section has a purpose, and the whole article is structured in	sections and headings that are easy to follow without being confusing or overly detailed. You might consider adding a section detailing the effect on humans--you mention a few times that humans are affected but you do not specifically state why. Elaborate on that.

Writing adequately developed and supported by evidence, examples (specifics)
I think you made a good effort to use examples to support your claims, yet I felt that the Overgrazing section was noticeably lacking in examples. What type of livestock overgraze. How does overgrazing occur relative to normal grazing? Good use of examples in the Small Mammals section! I do have a problem with the Climate Change section. Perhaps it is a typo, but you state that "Studies have shown that the climate of regions affected by grassland degradation has steadily risen over the past decades." My issue lies in your use of the word climate. Climates cannot "rise". If you mean the temperature or moisture level or some aspect of climate has increased, then specify that. As it reads now, it is confusing and wrong.

Well written: clear, concise sentences comprehendible at a high school level
The entire article is concise and understandable to a high school audience. My only concern is that it might be too concise. Each of the subsections under Causes should be elaborated upon e.g. Human Interference includes three causes at the end of the paragraph, but there is no elaboration in these human disturbances. Personally, I have never heard of this phenomenon, so a bit more of an explanation would be interesting and is necessary. Also, I would like to know more about the black soil. Is it still arable?

Factual, not persuasive writing: neutral, unbiased
This article maintains a good sense of neutral writing and is not specific to any side. There is no persuasion used.

Appropriate section headings
Good job on titling the sections: they are appropriate and flow well. However, maybe consider changing the name of the Results section to (Negative) Consequences or something similar. This would increase understanding of that section's purpose. "Results" just does not seem like a fitting title. Also, for the Disturbance Regime section, perhaps use that phrase within the writing to give an example to people as to what it is (and you could add an internal link to the Wiki page).

Appropriate references provided, including scientific peer-reviewed articles
Your sources seem appropriate and diverse. They are peer-reviewed scientific articles and you use them well in the whole article. My only edit would be in the Overgrazing section, perhaps you should add in more information seeing as you cite two sources but only have three very brief and non-illustrative sentences.

In-line links appropriate
I am unsure about this (ask Dr. Carmichael), but it would seem that you only need to link to the same page once e.g. you link to grasslands when you first use that word, so every subsequent time you use that word you do not need to link to it again. Other than that your links seem appropriate to the article and relevant in providing more detail on specific items.

No grammatical or spelling error
I went ahead and corrected the minor grammar errors and sentence structure errors in your post. Check the history to see my edits.

Rlambert1893 (talk) 01:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Jason peer edit
Sorry, yesterday I checked the course page and did not see your article, but as I was looking at it a few minutes ago I realized it was in your sandbox just not posted on the course page. Starting with revisions or edits I think you just have to link words the first time they appear. I don’t think they have to be linked after that. You have grasslands, burrowing, overgrazing, etc. linked several times. Under climate change when you write that the climate of regions affected has risen, I’m not sure what you mean. Do you mean that the average temperature of these affected regions has risen? I’m not sure saying the climate has risen is the same as saying the average temperature of the affected areas has risen, if that was what you meant. Under Geography if you have explanations to why sloped, high altitude areas, etc. go through less degradation it would be a nice inclusion. “Regions affected to a lesser degree are? not as widespread as those that are more harshly impacted.” I went ahead and put in the word “of” in “in terms of plants” under the results section. I think the overall article is very nice. It was a well-organized article. The multiple sections made it easy to navigate. Jason1035 (talk) 18:11, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Jason

Review from Dr. Becky
Your peers have provided solid feedback on your article and I encourage you to apply the suggestions throughout. You have gathered several good references and have organized the ideas. The are major issues with the overall clarity of the article. Each section lacks details that allow the reader to clearly understand the topic and why it is important. For example, there needs to be a Lead section that introduces and defines grassland degradation, indicating where it occurs, and why we should care about it. This helps establish notability. Carefully review all sections and elaborate on your points further- fully develop the ideas. Be sure that heading titles are descriptive and reflect the content within. Connections to disturbance ecology and society need to be clearer. Look for external links to include that allow the reader to gather more information about this topic. Also examine word choices. The topic is interesting and is well-researched holding promise to be a great contribution! B.J.Carmichael (talk) 03:28, 20 March 2014 (UTC)