User:Jclawlor/Marine geology/Mbrookemac Peer Review

General info
Jclawlor
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Jclawlor/Marine geology
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Marine geology

Evaluate the drafted changes
Very good job! I thought what you added was very interesting and a great addition to the original (very short) article. You gave a deal more perspective into the development of marine geology as a subject. In my peer review (below) I give some suggestions on how to make it a little more credible and also to expand on your article for the next assignments (if you want to use them!). Once again, great job!

Lead

The lead has a good definition and overview of what is included in marine geology. The lead could be updated with a paragraph on the article's sections including the newly added 'history' and 'methods' section, it is almost too concise, however, the article is very short so it should be developed with the article. It contains information on the military and economic importance of marine geology but this is not talked about in the rest of the article (so you could take this out or touch on it in a new section).

Content

The content you added is all relevant to the topic. The article has been relatively untouched until this assignment so there is still a lot of information that can be added, topological features and examples of plate tectonics (Mariana's Trench is already there but uncited and you could add sections on other trenches, volcano ranges, islands from plate tectonics like the Philippines, anywhere there is a feature created by plate tectonics) are topics you could add. The article doesn't deal with any historical perspectives or populations.

A possible limitation you could add to bathymetry is that shallow depths provide more accurate data since sound wave travel speed can be affected by temperature (speed decreases when temp decreases) and depth (as pressure increases, speed of sound increases). This is based on what I learned in intro to oceanography so you would have to look it up to confirm but if you're interested this could be added. I looked it up quickly and found this you could look at [https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/925/1/012056/meta#:~:text=The%20Different%20temperature%20and%20salinity,LiDAR%20altimetry%20(ALB)%20surveys. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/925/1/012056/meta#:~:text=The%20Different%20temperature%20and%20salinity,LiDAR%20altimetry%20(ALB)%20surveys.].

Tone and Balance

The content added to the article is of a neutral tone, it does not include any opinions. The added sections contribute positively to the overall balance of the article as the original is very underdeveloped and missing much information. The added content discusses no controversial topics (as in, there is not more than one viewpoint to write about) and so the content added is not biased towards any particular 'side'. Further development of the article with sections potentially on topological traits or phenomenon will help to balance the article because there is still much information missing.

Sources and References

Source links are all functional, up-to-date, and accurately reflect the information in the article. The sources are from an array of institutions and people however, many sources, though not unreliable, are not academic. Some don't have to be like the links to the marine geology institutions but some could be replaced by peer-reviewed sources. For example, your citations from The Encyclopedia of Britannica and National Geographic aren't from bad sources necessarily, but there are more credible sources like journals. I found this on plate tectonics if you want to use it, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1342937X20302847?casa_token=wk9Nvw2SjI8AAAAA:NEihfqyJnf6ToVtp3hv9w5ngrV6YkkOS1xmG77oz8S-EbadxoeJdrKOWHAlPgCBc4RdTAMMBY8z1.

Additionally, the formatting of the citations needs to be revised because there is a lot of information missing. It seems like Wikipedia cannot access citation information in some cases make sure to check each one. If you choose to use the Encyclopedia of Britannica, they have a build in citation button at the top of the article.

Under 'history'- "In later years, newer technology was able to date the rocks and identified that rocks closest to the ridge were younger than the rocks near the coasts of the Western and Eastern Hemispheres land" is uncited.

Organization

You did a great job with the clarity of the article, the content you added is well-written with little to no spelling or grammatical errors. The text read smoothly and I did not find myself getting lost at any point while I read it (really great writing style especially for a potentially dry topic). You internally structured your sections well, the flow of what you added makes sense and is easy to follow and I like that you gave a little intro to your methods section. My only suggestion for the introduction to this section is that it could be a bit more detailed, explaining what you'll be talking about in that section (methods and their advantages and disadvantages). In terms of overall structure, I would suggest to add the original 'overview' section to 'history' or at least above all the other sections (besides the lead) since it doesn't make sense for an overview to come after new information.

In the lead, the wording of "The deep ocean floor is the last essentially unexplored frontier and detailed mapping in support of both military (submarine) objectives and economic (petroleum and metal mining) objectives drives the research.–" (part of original article) does not make much sense.

It might seem silly but "Developed in the late 1960s" in your methods section should be reworded because it could potentially be plagiarism since 3 or more of the same words in a row is copying. There might be special cases for instances where the wording is something like "John Smith was born in 1967" so this might be an exception too but I'm not sure.

Images and Media

As a reader, it would be interesting and helpful (people aren't overly likely to look up something on their own) to add pictures of the different images that are created depending on the method/technique used. This would make it easy to compare the quality/information gathered by each method and make it easier to understand why some people would choose one method over another.