Talk:Water balance

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 30 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Baileypringle8. Peer reviewers: CSharpMajor7, TylerStrachan, Plewis77, ReynaDenigan, Pbuell2244.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Merge Monthly water balance model→Water_balance
I don't see why water balance recorded on a monthly interval requries its own article; why not move it here? +mwtoews 23:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Water balance definition
Hello again. If I am not mistaken you deleted the definition of Water balance that I had added. In the “View history”, you wrote define it in the first sentence, don't add a lead sentence that isn't covered in the rest of the article. I have difficulty with this:

1- don't add a lead sentence: I thought the best thing is to first exactly define the title of an article, if possible. The current (original) first sentence does not define it, it says “water balance equation can be used to describe”. But Water balance is a universal Law that both describes and prescribes (forces a certain behavior according to the Law). This first sentence and the first paragraph do not have references. I also did not put any references, but there are many and I can directly quote from various well-known hydrology books.

2- isn't covered in the rest of the article: I don’t understand what you mean. The definition I wrote is indeed used in the next sections to write the equations of water balance. Both the definition and the equations must convey the same concept. But, the current (original) first sentence does not correspond with the equations. For example, the equations have “change in storage” and the current first sentence does not refer to it, which is ok, because it is not a definition, it is just part of a truth.

I would like to suggest to put back the exact definition that I had with two three references, or give quotes. Any thoughts please. Mitral8 (talk) 11:09, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm at a bit of a loss with this article. It was poor before we came to it, and I'm not sure it has been improved.  I don't have a lot to contribute and I don't have any great ideas how to sort it out.  My best suggestion would be to get the body of the article as complete as you can and then rewrite the lead completely.  However, if you just put back what you had before I won't revert it and we'll see if anyone else has anything to say on the subject.
 * Perhaps a few words about what I feel is wrong with the article and with your approach to it. The article previously was describing water balance as being an equation describing the balance between "water in" and "water out" of almost any system but in particular in hydrology.  The last sentence of the lead, stating that it is also used in living organisms, is part of the problem.  First, it implies that the article is about two different things, which means there should be two articles.  Also there is nothing in the body of the article about this, and no references for it.  Your new lead sentence gives an alternate definition where water balance is a "universal law", then goes on to give the original definition.  This jars.  You might think it is just the same thing, but it doesn't come across that way.  If it is the same thing then just say it once.  If it is different things then explain the difference.  Hopefully, we don't end up with an article about three different things.  This is why I think it would be helpful to write the article first and the entire lead last, then it will be very clear in your head and on paper what the article is about and the lead will be a cohesive summary of it.  Along those lines, it may help to put the general first and the specific last.  The first section is "equation for a basin", a specific equation for a specific type of water balance.  The second section is "water balance of a system" which sounds like a general explanation of the water balance of any system, although in practice it is specific to hydrology and also includes some more general equations for the water balance of certain systems.  Good luck.  Lithopsian (talk) 14:10, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you and yes, when I first read the article, I felt the same as you, i.e., the first equation was showing Water Balance as a universal law, but the texts were confusing. Then I decided to start making changes little by little. Having in mind that Water Balance has only one definition in water systems and hydrology, I thought to start with its definition to see feedbacks... Ok, I will put the definition back as the first sentence with credible references, and then wait to see feedbacks and continue from there. Mitral8 (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)