Talk:Wetland

Suggestions for improvement (March 2021)
I have some suggestions for improvements. I'll try to work on this article in the next few months but if someone else gets here before then, these are the things that I noticed:
 * Some of the headings feel messy, use more standard headings
 * There is a lot of bold formatting in the text which should probably be removed
 * There is a repetition of the heading "human impact" - bundle that under a stand-along heading on human impact?
 * Article goes into too much detail in areas where sub-articles exist (I have just corrected that for the sub-topic of constructed wetland where I have now replaced text with an excerpt.
 * The lead is a bit short and not a good summary of the article yet.
 * The readability score is quite low, so the readability should be improved (use easier to understand language). EMsmile (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: I have now taken out the repetitive heading on "human impact" and also deleted some content that was unsourced, overly detailed, not encyclopedic (not summary style). There is actually a lot of content here without sources which needs to be corrected. EMsmile (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Image collage for the lead
I've created an image collage for the lead which looks better than four images below each other. However, we need to ponder over the choice of images. Does it show a good range of different types of wetlands and locations? Should the schematic be replaced with a photo? Overall, I feel that we should probably add more photos from the Global South to this article. Should a constructed wetland photo be included in the lead? It's a subset of wetlands but I wasn't sure if one of them should be included in the collage. EMsmile (talk) 09:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Do wetlands exist in Antarctica? Seems to be unclear.
I have a question about this sentence "Wetlands occur naturally on every continent " The publication is not open access and doesn't mention in the lead if they really exist on all continents including Antarctica. Could we replace this with a better reference or add one that makes a statement about Antarctica? Note that EPA says "except Antarctica", see here. A google search on the topic lead me to this, which talks about a "wetland like" system beneath the ice: https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=138450. But I am not sure if this could be termed a wetland in the conventional sense. So I think we need to provide more clarity on this (but perhaps not in the lead is it's not that important). EMsmile (talk) 09:39, 8 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Here's a reference on Antarctic ephemeral wetlands. The Hydroecology of an Ephemeral Wetland in the McMurdo Dry Valleys, Antarctica
 * https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019JG005153#:~:text=Wetlands%20occur%20in%20the%20polar%20desert%20regions%20of%20the%20Arctic%20and%20Antarctic. ASRASR (talk) 10:07, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems to be disputed whether such kind of wetlands are "conventional wetlands". Or why else would the EPA website say "except Antarctica" (unless they copied this from the Wikipedia article earlier!). Might need a little deeper digging and then explaining in the Wikipedia article e.g. "some scholars describe the existence of wetland-type systems in Antarctica as "wetlands" whereas others don't regard these as wetlands". Or we e-mail EPA and ask if their information is wrong? Found also this interesting discussion on Quora. I guess it comes down to the definition, whether something that is frozen for large parts of the year can be called a wetland. So either way, I think somewhere in the article (but not in the lead) we should explain the different viewpoints so that readers understand that it's not a yes or no answer. EMsmile (talk) 10:20, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * For now I've changed the sentence from to ""Wetlands occur naturally on every continent" to "Wetlands occur all over the world" - I think this is a safer statement, given all the uncertainties. EMsmile (talk) 10:29, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Removal of reference on Digital
Dear. Please explain your removal of this new reference added by in the Monitoring and Mapping Section:

"Digital Twin Enabled Mass Personalization: A Case Study of a Smart Wetland Maintenance System". American Society of Mechanical Engineers. MSEC2020 (8363): 6. January 15, 2021 – via ASME

I can see the reference isn't at all formatted properly. Is this the reason? Can fix this? Regards ASRASR (talk) 09:27, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * SomayehMontaseri (and another account, currently named Sustainabilityandresilience but called 'SuezSmartSolution' prior to a recent rename) have been spamming citations related to a company called Suez Smart Solutions and its employees across Wikipedia, including this one on a case study undertaken by the company. I removed it as promotion / citation spam. It had nothing to do with formatting, and I do not believe that this citation improves the article. It should be left out. MrOllie (talk) 10:47, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Clarification comments on the table dealing with nitrous oxide fluxes
Dear re table on nitrous oxide fluxes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetland#Greenhouse_gas_emissions. Please explain your comment requesting clarification in 3 places in this table. Are you questioning the referenced data that have negative to positive ranges? Fluxes can be both negative and positive. Regards ASRASR (talk) 12:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi ASRASR (1) The minus sign and the n-dash are very similar, so first of all I wasn't totally sure which was meant. You have now explained that they are minus signs. So for clarity, the dashes should be replaced by "to", or something similar. (2) You have also now explained that fluxes can be both negative and positive. Not being an expert (like many other users) I don't understand what a negative flux means, so that should be explained somewehere in the article. Regards ---Speminallium (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi . Yes negative fluxes are caused by uptake of N2O by the soil. I will add that explanation in a footnote to the table. I had no trouble differentiating between the negative sign and the larger n-dash. They are rather different e.g −0.07 – 0.06. Wouldn't you agree? I suppose changing the "n-dash" to "to" is possible. Please go ahead with that change if you wish. Regards ASRASR (talk) 21:33, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's helpful. Regards---Speminallium (talk) 07:10, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I have moved this now to Wetland methane emissions as I felt it was too detailed. I've also proposed on the talk page of that article to rename it to Wetland greenhouse gas emissions. EMsmile (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: that sub-article has now been renamed to Greenhouse gas emissions from wetlands. EMsmile (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Section on Biodiversity
I have modified the reference to Lake Baikal specifying instead the wetlands in the Selenga River Delta of Lake Baikal. Lake Baikal is not a wetland and the text dealing with its biodiversity has been removed. Have saved it here so it can be moved to the article on Lake Baikal. Text removed: ''Evidence from a research study by Mazepova et al. suggest that the number of crustacean species endemic to Baikal Lake (over 690 species and subspecies) exceeds the number of the same groups of animals inhabiting all the fresh water bodies of Eurasia together. Its 150 species of free-living Platyhelminthes alone is analogous to the entire number in all of Eastern Siberia. The 34 species and subspecies number of Baikal sculpins is more than twice the number of the analogous fauna that inhabits Eurasia. In southern Baikal, about 300 species of free-living nematodes were found in only six near-shore sampling localities. "If we will take into consideration, that about 60% of the animals can be found nowhere else except Baikal, it may be assumed that the lake may be the biodiversity center of the Eurasian continent."'' ASRASR (talk) 14:25, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Is your recommendation to move the text to Lake Baikal? How come there are no references though, did you drop them when you moved this to the talk page or were there none to start with? EMsmile (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Some problems with the references
There are still quite a few references that have either no URL to go with them or where the link is no longer working. There seems to be a problem with many of the refs that go to the Ramsar convention website, i.e. these refs are all going to dead links: 2, 19, 29, 50, 104. Also, I don't understand what this sentence is mean to say: Unless otherwise cited, ecosystem services information is based on the following series of references. We should not use such a sentence but rather provide in-line citations. This is perhaps a left over from a very old version of this article. EMsmile (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Worked on the section on "climate change aspects"
I've done some work on the section on "climate change aspects":
 * I've consolidated the info about GHG emissions in one place instead of two. I've moved some content that I felt was too detailed to Wetland methane emissions. I've also proposed on the talk page there to rename that article to Wetland greenhouse gas emissions. Please comment there. (update: that article has now been renamed to greenhouse gas emissions from wetlands). EMsmile (talk) 22:54, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I think we need to explain to non-expert readers (like myself) how it can be that wetlands on the one hand emit dangerous greenhouse gases but on the other hand are useful for climate change mitigation. When do they do which and what role are humans playing with their interferences? There is no logical flow between the two sections on GHGE and mitigation in the article yet. Can someone help?
 * The info on mitigation and adaptation should be updated with the latest info and figures from the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WG III on mitigation and WG II on adaptation. I don't have time myself at the moment, so just putting this here as a reminder for someone.
 * However having said that, how can we ensure that similar content about wetlands as a carbon sink is not repeated in several locations? Maybe just put it in one location and then use an excerpt for the other locations? I see it currently in this article, also in climate change mitigation, carbon sequestration, blue carbon, biosequestration. Also pinging User:Chidgk1 and User:Epipelagic in case they are interested in wetlands/blue carbon/carbon sequestration etc. EMsmile (talk) 20:30, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Current Topics in Earth and Environmental Sciences
— Assignment last updated by Aditoaster12 (talk) 17:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)