User:ElizabethAS96/sandbox

EOSC 475 Reviewers
Please go to Nick's sandbox to review Aureoumbra lagunensis

Content Evaluation
Does cover early history. Talks about what catalyzed early, basic knowledge of the ocean (particularly the surface) into what oceanography is about today.

The article seems to insinuate that biological oceanography and marine biology are the same thing, just by a different name; this is misleading!

Phrase "skeleton" in reference to calcium carbonate structures also quite misleading, not a phrase used by oceanographers very often...

Need citation for "affected planktonic organisms... all important in the food chain." Note: food chain is an inaccurate descriptor here, oceanographers often use "food web" instead.

Does not describe/list which 4/5 ocean basins THC connects.

Whole section on "ocean currents" is confusing, could be worded better, missing a few points.

Evaluating Tone
Does appear to be neutral. Provides many citations, links where needed, all seem to be independent and reliable sources (most are journal articles).

Evaluating Sources
All Links I tried seem to work. All seem to be good sources, i.e. independent and scholarly.

Talk Page
Lots of discussion about citations not being good/broken from several years ago, and one big update from earlier this year (Jan 2018).

Level 4 vital article in Science, Physics (Start-Class). Part of Oceans, Physics, Geography WikiProjects.

Overall this is a very general article, does not talk in depth or really scientifically (i.e. correct words/phrases) like we have in class.