User:Iheanyiarizor/Surface runoff/TOTM123 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Iheanyiarizor


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Surface Runoff
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Surface runoff

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The lead section is concise and clearly describes the newly added content in the article. The introductory sentence is well structured and thoroughly describes the sub-sections preceding it. One improvement could be to format the lead further, to use more accessible language so things flow better.

Content

Content added is of substantial quality and of high relevancy to the topic chosen. The content added is up-to-date and contains insightful added information, such as the bit on how 'runoff can occur either through the natural or man-made processes'. Overall, the content is great quality, and just needs a little more of it.

Tone and Balance

The added content was neutral. It doesn't attempt to sway or change my personal opinions and strives to keep a neutral tone.

Sources and References

Most sources seem to be valid, peer-reviewed sources. Some links work, others do-not, but all links are properly formatted. A sight improvement could be adding the source for the 'Horton Papers' and the section on 'Agricultural issues'.

Organization

The content is digestible and well presented. The added content does not appear to display major errors.

Images and Media

In the draft no images were included, but this is reasonable due to the extremist approach of Wikipedia when it comes to image-use.

Talk Page Discussion

The talk page lacks current discussion, however that's understandable as only a subset of the article is in the sandbox.

Overall Impressions

Overall, a good job with layout for the added information. The content you decided to add is sourced and clear to understand. In the future, additional content could be added to further increase the robustness of the article.