User:Izzy Eckert/Climate change in Wisconsin/Addyalaska Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Izzy Eckert


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Izzy%20Eckert/Climate_change_in_Wisconsin?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Climate change in Wisconsin

Evaluate the drafted changes
''Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?''

Heavy precip/flooding

The quote (which I realize is from a previous editor) is very long. It seems like that information could be rewritten/paraphrased and combined with your other information.

The section on how dangerous floods can be seems a little bit out of place. I think having some discussion of the dangers of flooding is relevant, but shorten that section and/or try to tie it back to Wisconsin more specifically.

Winter rec

Once again, I would try to remove the long EPA quote... Otherwise added info seems helpful

Agriculture

Again, I'd try to remove/break up that quote. Very good additions otherwise. I think you could entirely take that quote out and the info you provide accurately sums up the topic.

Great Lakes

Same thing about the quote

Air Pollution

Quote again. Added info is good and relevant!

''Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?''

It does seem fairly neutral.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

The viewpoint of the EPA seems pretty overrepresented! Obviously our assignment is not to completely re-create the article, but I do think this page very clearly needs the additional sources and to have someone remove those quotes and replace them with a well cited summary that isn't just pasting an entire EPA page into wikipedia...

''Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?''

All good here!

''Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?''

Yes.

''Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?''

No