User:Domixox/sandbox

Article Evaluation - Tornado climatology

 * 1) The articles clearly explains the title. It includes the examples, the environment needed for tornados to form, where tornados are most common (the USA). It mentions every continent apart from Antartica the frequency of tornados, including subsections of more prevalent countries such as the US and Canada.
 * 2) The information is mostly dated but there are some examples of 2018 sources. There is reference to long term treads which only go up to 2011, but this could be due to census data or data not yet released. Overall there seems to be a lot of information around 1970 to 2000 but less closer to the present.
 * 3) To improve this article there could be more current references to examples of tornado events and reference to climate change, how it is increasing the number of tornados. However, this articles is very consistent and clearly explaining the title of question. I think there should be information of who named and discovered the science behind tornados.
 * 4) The article is very neutral, it clearly talks about the facts and event that occurred, along with the science of how tornados form.
 * 5) There is more information written about the US than most other countries even though they are more prepared and there is a smaller mortality rate from tornados than developing countries, this should slight bias.
 * 6) Some citations are missing but all the citations work and so do the references.
 * 7) There are all relevant to the article and help back up the legitimacy of the information. some references come from news reports of tornado events, most are peer reviewed literature and scientific organisations such as the "Hurricane Research Division".

Soil acidification

 * 1) The content is relevant to the topic, however it is slightly vague and more scientific data could be added and cited to improve the quality of the work. Could also meant the why acidification is happen, does it have any reference to climate change.
 * 2) Yes, the article is written neutrally as it just regurgitated the information and facts, it does not hold a specific point of view.
 * No, there are very few citations, but as the information is factual that is expected.
 * 1) The few references that are present are reliable from peer reviewed sources.

Clean Power Plan

 * 1) The content is relevant to the topic of the US policy aimed at reducing carbon emissions. This is very relevant to present day climate change debates especially in the political sphere. The article is very detailed about the aims, the benefits - socially, economically and environmentally, the legal process and the timeline of events to stop the clean power plan not going through congress.
 * 2) Yes, it is neutral as it does speak about the facts however it does press that Trumps administration aimed to eliminate the plan which wasn't beneficial for the US. Therefore, this could be a controversial topic.
 * 3) There are many citations to back up the information.
 * 4) The references range from news reports to peer reviewed literature to books - therefore are very reliable.

Battery recycling

 * 1) The article clearly explains the different batteries and their process of recycling. It talks about the different policies aiming to reduce battery waste and recycle more, this includes the EU. I
 * 2) Yes, it is neutral as it does not reflect the need for recycling just the factual process and news surrounding it.
 * 3) There are many citations and data included in the work.
 * 4) The references vary from news articles, google pages, peer reviewed journals - therefore is mostly accurate but the google pages are not a reliable source of information.

Adding citation
Soil acidification - Plant roots acidify soil by releasing protons and organic acids so as to chemically weather soil minerals. I added a citation to the chemical weather, it was an article around mechanism and effect of chemical weathering of sedimentary rocks - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016512500080022X

Plastic Soup
This article is very impressive, it is neutral, states the key points in the introduction, and is cited well. I would consider separating the article into subheadings if you wanted to develop it further. The last paragraph might sound better if placed below the second paragraph. The flow of writing is very good and does not favour a certain point of view. There is a clear structure and balanced coverage. There is a great range of sources from primary to secondary. Overall very well done!

Paleoendemism
There is a strong start to the article, shown when defining the key words that are being explained. It could be useful to separate the article into sections, including headers such as history or reason behind paleoendenism or different countries which have example of paleoendenism. I don't recommend starting a sentence with "Because" it stops the flow of the article. Some good example of Paleoendemism but these could be sectioned off into separate sections. The article is neutral and does not favour a specific side. There is no concrete conclusion summarising paleoendenism, however, I presume this is because you have not finished yet. Very well done on your article!

Summary
The 2014–17 Brazilian drought is a severe drought affecting the southeast of Brazil including the metropolitan areas of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. In São Paulo, it has been described as the worst drought in 100 years. The city of São Paulo appeared to be affected the most and by the beginning of February many of its residents were subjected to sporadic water cutoffs. Rain at the end of 2015 and in early 2016 brought relief, however, long term problems in water supply remain in São Paulo state.

Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo still being affected by drought in 2016 due to the 2014–16 El Niño event. In these areas the rains are irregular since 2014 and the drought worsened from 2015.Over 50% of the Brazil was affected, as the drought spanned sections of all nine northeastern states. Between 2012-2015, the federal government decreed a state of “public calamity” over 6,200 times due to the droughts.

This is the worst drought in Brazil in the last 100 years, according to the O Estado de S. Paulo in September 2017.

Effect on crop production
Brazil is the world’s third-largest agricultural exporter, and the sector represents approximately 6% of the country’s GDP. Irrigation for agriculture accounts for 72% of water use in Brazil, compared to just 9% for urban consumption. Less water supply for crop production lead to "The Agricultural Economy Institute" stating that 2014 accounted for São Paulo's worst agricultural losses in half a century.

The irregular rainfall pattern contributed to a reduction in crop production through the drought period, due to an atmospheric blockage which prevented a cold front from advancing over key crop regions in Brazil, the world's largest exporter of coffee, sugar, soy and beef. In 2014 the drought wiped out a third of the country's coffee crop in some areas, which caused global coffee arabica prices to rise 50% over the year. In 2015 coffee trees had not recovered from the extreme heat and drought quick enough, triggering another arabica price rally. Crop production of soy, one of the country’s largest export crops, decreased by 17% during the drought.

The Cemaden’s Rain Monitoring System showed that severe droughts were observed  in the states of Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, they are both the largest regions for soybean production and fourth-largest beef producers in Brazil.

Effect on hydropower generation
As 70% of Brazil’s electricity is generated by hydropower, the lack of water lead to energy rationing in addition to water rationing. In response to decreased hydroelectric power, rolling power cuts were instituted. Water and electricity prices were expected to rise a month or two after the elections in October. Power utilities In Brazil stated that the loss of hydro-generating capacity had cost them 15.8bn reais (£4.3bn). Most of this was spent on more expensive alternative such as oil and other carbon-based fuels that filled the gap in electricity supply. This in turn pushed up Brazil's greenhouse gas emissions in the years of 2015 to 2017.

Potential solutions
Analysts see the crisis as a relatively short-term stressor but believe that it has the potential to be the "catalyst" to solve specifically São Paulo’s water problems. Short term solutions include drilling more wells and more recycling of water. Long term solutions include the transfer of more water from additional river basins. Thus, a new 15 km connection has been authorised to be built to bring water from the Paraiba do Sul river basin to the Cantareira system, watersheds that have distinct aquatic biota. . These water diversion projects transport water between isolated river basins, without regard for ecology or aquatic biodiversity. Also, repair of leaking pipes is estimated to save 6% of total municipal water consumption in São Paulo.

In 2018, steep fines were implement for above-average water use, but some fear the measure came too late. The Cantareira reservoir was at 6.8% capacity at the start of 2018, even after several afternoons of violent summer rainstorms in Sao Paulo.

Reflective Essay
During this project I learnt the ins and outs of how Wikipedia ensures articles are reliable and how articles are constantly being improved by a range of different people. When evaluating my article at the beginning, I followed the criteria suggested by Wiki Education Dashboard, looking out for: neutral tone, clear structure, balanced content, good sourcing, and a detailed lead section. The article I improved on was the 2014-17 Brazilian drought. My main critiques I had at the start were the repeated sentences and the half-written paragraphs, along with the minimal amount of references and examples. When I first started on my article, all it had was a couple paragraphs with a description followed by one cause of the drought and its extent. I was able to add several new sections to the article, with key references. The article is still an ongoing issue, so I updated the information with recent data and news reports on the Brazilian drought. During my assignment I edited each section including: the summary, the potential causes, the effect on crop production and potential solutions. Prior to my involvement most of the information was from a single source and outdated, my aim was to bring material from a range of literature and government websites to provide reliable information to this global issue.

I did not receive peer reviewed feedback, but as the article was an improvement and I was not starting from scratch this helped me development my progress. I was not able to identify which factors the article needed to improve on according to the criteria suggested by the Wiki Education Dashboard. As I progressed in the assignment, I found more and more information surrounding the topic, however it was difficult to identify which was the most relevant to readers who would want to understand only the key material. Another problem I observed was changing the article name, as the drought did not end in 2017 it is ongoing currently, this is something I would change in the future if I had more time.

Overall, this project has taught be how write accurately but also unbiased on a specific topic. It helped me improve my research skills and identifying material that is relevant whilst still being balanced. It allowed me to review other people’s work and use that information on how to improve my own article. I have enjoyed writing a Wikipedia article due to the fact that the final material is now publicly available and can be useful to others in the future. The project was very different to other assignments I have completed in the past as it encompassed many skills such as research, critical evaluation, and essay writing just to name a few. I feel that I provided information that can have a significant influence on education of the Brazilian drought and could help to solve the issue in the future.