Talk:Irrigation in Peru

Review
Please, review Irrigation in Peru and share your comments regarding editing, content and/or applications. Anunezsanchez (talk) 20:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I would add as an historic fact that the sharp decrease of the indigenous population following the events of the hispanic conquest (mainly due to the new diseases brought by the europeans) was a mayor contributor to the failure of the irrigation infrastructure, an analog process to what happened to mesopothamia after the mongolic and timurid conquest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.30.108.219 (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Page references
This is a well informed and heavily referenced article which are good things. However, it desperately needs page references. Wikipedia articles are required to be verifiable thus, readers should be able to compare the article with its sources. For that it is necessary to provide page references so that readers know in what part of books or pdf documents to look for. Also, as a minor suggestion, it might be a good idea to have the "References" section above the "Sources" section as this is the standard academic practice. --Victor12 (talk) 22:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments before this article gets reviewed
This article is using a unique referencing system that I have never seen in a Wikipedia article before. Anyways, before this article gets reviewed, the references should all be placed after any punctuation marks per WP:FN. Gary King ( talk ) 01:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. --Victor12 (talk) 01:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there any specific reason why this referencing method is used? Also, I recommend adding references to paragraphs without one, just to show that all of the information is indeed referenced. Gary King ( talk ) 01:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have added references to each paragraph. Also, Gary King, I use the Harvard Citation Style. I use it because is the citation method I normally use when writing papers. I like it because it allows you to see the name of the author in the main text. So after reading it, and before going into the references you already have a sense of who is the main author referenced in the text and/or who says what. But, again this citation method is just another option to choose from those allowed by Wikipedia.--anunezsanchez (talk) 14:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Scartol
Let me start by apologizing for only now reviewing this article. You've asked me for some time to have a look, and I feel bad that I'm only able to provide these comments while it's listed at GAN. Hopefully I'll be more of a help than a burden. =)

You've got some excellent info here, and it's well organized. You've obviously done a lot of work on this, and you are to be commended for your arduous labor. There are some things that need fixing, but I've no doubt you can remedy them without too many headaches.


 * Irrigation in Peru has been – and is expected to remain – a major contributor to increasing the country's food security, agricultural growth, and human development in rural areas. This sentence (the article's first) presents a problem which appears throughout the piece: the appearance of a particular point of view. The use of passive voice is chiefly to blame here: Who expects irrigation to remain a major contributor to improving these elements?
 * The second sentence is also problematic: Water resources and irrigation infrastructure are unequally distributed throughout the country, creating very different realities. While this may be a point most (or even all) people agree with, it's still an opinion. The word "unequally" and the phrase "very different realities" are heavy with inference – we should try something more fact-based, like "Water resources and irrigation infrastructure vary throughout the country."


 * Speaking of the lead, it should be a summary of the article as a whole; for a page of this length, I recommend 3-4 paragraphs, with short descriptions of each major section featured in the article body itself. If you haven't already, please read WP:LEAD. I usually write the lead at the end of the process, so I can more easily summarize its contents.


 * The article could stand some reorganization. I recommend moving "History of the irrigation sector" to the top of the article's body, since the page is meant to provide an overall view of the entire topic of irrigation in Peru. (Chronology is not the only way to approach such a thing, obviously, but in this case – and in most such articles, I've found – it's the best way.)


 * Other suggestions about the article's structure:
 * Let's rename "Government strategy on the irrigation sector" into "National Irrigation Strategy", and make it a sub-section of "Irrigation development".
 * How about combining "Environmental impacts of irrigation" and "Possible climate change impacts on irrigated agriculture" into subheads of a section titled something like "Environmental impacts and effects"?
 * I recommend making "Water tariff and cost recovery", "Investment and financing", and "External cooperation" into subheads of a section titled something like "Economics".
 * "Annex 1: Lessons learned from the Peruvian model" seems opinionated. I recommend incorporating the information here into the rest of the article. (For example, the paragraph which begins: "Part of the success comes from the Government and WUBs sharing investment responsibilities..." could go in the "Economics" section.) You'll also want to revise wording like "delivering positive results", which is vague and POV. Instead, focus only on facts: in this case, you can just jump to the bit about "combining financial support and capacity building with regularization of water rights".

If you agree with these structural changes, go ahead and make them (or let's discuss them), and then I'll be happy to have a closer look at the individual sections. Kudos again on all of your hard work here. – Scartol  •  Tok  15:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for review
On my user talk page I received the following request: It is interesting to see that that Wikipedia users try to involve each other in the continuous process of improving articles. I have read the article and was highly impressed by it, especially by its contents, intentions and goals, and I have no immediate criticisms. I did not look into details like style, format, standards and norms, and other formal Wikipedia requirements for articles, as I found the article surveyable, readible and clear. I lived with my family and worked in Peru in the nineteenseventies, a period characterised in the article as "a period of stagnation and limited development". Although it is hard to substantiate such type of characterizations and they verge on the limits of opiniation, I believe this. Since then, many activities were undertaken in this field that I could not follow anymore, but that I got aware of a few years ago during a conference on the subject in Lima. My specific knowledge is in the field of waterlogging (called "drainage problems" in the article) and soil salination of irrigated lands, the side effects and environmental impacts of irrigation. As the conference provided me with fresh information, dear Mschiffler, I will consider to contribute with an extension in the section "Environmental impacts of irrigation". The request for review has also a side effect: I will consider the write a new article on "Environmental impacts of irrigation" that does not yet exist. See Environmental degradation. In addition, I have seen just now that the article on waterlogging leaves much to be desired. Hence, I intend to make a contribution here too. Mschiffer, I am afraid your request for review is causing a chain reaction that will keep me busy for a while. Have you put others to work like this very often? R.J.Oosterbaan (talk) 12:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I read on your user page that you worked in Peru and that you have worked on irrigation. I'd be interested to have you review, and perhaps edit, the article Irrigation in Peru. Looking forward to your comments.--Mschiffler (talk) 13:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I am very glad that you like the article. I am glad that my comment has motivated you to contribute your knowledge on environmental impacts of irrigation to Wikipedia, both in a generic new article and by expanding the existing section in Irrigation in Peru. I am trying to energize more people to contribute their knowledge to Wikipedia, and hopefully you will be one of many!--Mschiffler (talk) 15:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The section on environmental impacts has now been extended.R.J.Oosterbaan (talk) 00:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! Just one remark:The 1960 irrigated area is shown higher than the irrigable area in the table. Could that be a mistake?--Mschiffler (talk) 12:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * For 1964 (rather than 1960) there is indeed an uncertainty. The table of de la Torre from which the data originate uses the term "area física cultivada", which I translated into "Irrigated area", which might be interpreted as "Actually irrigated area" or "Actually cultivated area inside the irrigable area". I have quoted the figures correctly. In the text of his article de la Torre explains that it concerns the "costa Peruana". I do not know what to do about what seemingly is a discrepancy. Any suggestion? R.J.Oosterbaan (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have added de la Torre as a reference for the table. R.J.Oosterbaan (talk) 15:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sent the author a mail about the problem. Waiting for reply. R.J.Oosterbaan (talk) 10:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply received. There can be double cropping in a year. Table adjusted. R.J.Oosterbaan (talk) 20:41, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for checking this and for your entire contribution. The response makes sense.--Mschiffler (talk) 21:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Environmental impact of irrigation is now ready. R.J.Oosterbaan (talk) 11:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Irrigation in Peru. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071214164757/http://www.minag.gob.pe/hidro_drenaje_est.shtml to http://www.minag.gob.pe/hidro_drenaje_est.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080112143248/http://www.psi.gob.pe:80/InicioPSI.html to http://www.psi.gob.pe/inicioPSI.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071214164757/http://www.minag.gob.pe/hidro_drenaje_est.shtml to http://www.minag.gob.pe/hidro_drenaje_est.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 15:28, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Irrigation in Peru. 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/20110519070339/http://www.lamolina.edu.pe/FACULTAD/AGRICOLA/drat/web/RIEGO.doc to http://www.lamolina.edu.pe/FACULTAD/AGRICOLA/drat/web/RIEGO.doc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080302150130/http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries/peru/indexesp.stm to http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries/peru/indexesp.stm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708164919/http://www.clippingmedia.com/custm/notas.php?cod=390169 to http://www.clippingmedia.com/custm/notas.php?cod=390169
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080206151339/http://www.pronamachcs.gob.pe/pnmprincipal.asp to http://www.pronamachcs.gob.pe/pnmprincipal.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080509144032/http://www.comunidadandina.org/endex.htm to http://www.comunidadandina.org/endex.htm

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) 21:20, 16 November 2017 (UTC)