User:JoshuaERS/Military base/Bayley1234 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

JoshuaERS


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:JoshuaERS/Military base


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Military base

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi Joshua. Your additions to the Military base article on environmental impact are well written and thoroughly researched. Below, I have provided my comments on where you have done well and what could be improved for each of the criteria.

Lead


 * The lead does not appear to have been updated to refer to your discussion of environmental impacts. Remember to add something brief mentioning your section at the beginning of the article.

Content


 * All the content you have added appears to be highly relevant and up-to-date and provides a good general overview of the environmental impacts of military bases.
 * However, the content does not discuss the viewpoints, responses (discussed, for example, in No Bases? Assessing the Impact of Social Movements Challenging US Foreign Military Bases), or experiences of historically underrepresented populations who might be victims of their environmental impacts. This underrepresentation concerns Indigenous peoples surrounding local military bases or local populations around foreign military bases. For example, where you discuss noise pollution, you could mention its effects on nearby residents (discussed in Revisiting negative externalities of US military bases: the case of Okinawa). You could also mention the effects of military base PCBs on local hunting (discussed in Climate Change and the Politics of Military Bases).

Tone and Balance


 * Overall, you do a really good job of presenting the information with neutral language.
 * However, in the first sentence of the Impacts of Construction section, saying "like any construction project" potentially comes across as having a less than neutral tone, given that "like any" kind of makes an absolute statement that cannot be confirmed or denied, and makes a general comparison to all types of construction projects. I might remove this part of the sentence.
 * As stated in the above section, I would ensure that the content is balanced with the perspectives and experiences of underrepresented people surrounding military bases in relation to their environmental impacts.

Sources and References


 * Your sources appear to be current and thorough, and your writing accurately reflects what is written in your sources. However, you could include a more diverse spectrum of authors, such as those from international journals where possible to reflect global perspectives.
 * Where you cite the news source NPR, which is in your Beneficial Impacts section, I would supplement this source with peer-reviewed articles, such as "Soldiers in the garden: managing the US military training landscape"
 * I have also come across a number of peer-reviewed articles discussing what is mentioned in your "U.S. Forces Are Leaving a Toxic Environmental Legacy in Afghanistan" reference from Scientific American, so I would put these in to supplement that reference as it is not peer-reviewed.
 * I would also find a peer-reviewed article to supplement the "Department of Defense Climate Risk Analysis;" because this is an analysis conducted by the DoD, it is a primary source with potential for bias, so it should be backed by a secondary source.
 * Some claims are not cited but should be, as evidence of their validity. These claims are as follows:
 * "A training base to be constructed in a dense, forested area will involve the elimination of vegetation." This claim should be cited especially given that it specifies a "dense, forested area." (under Impacts of Construction)
 * "For example, in 2001 the United States Forces Korea Yongsan Garrison and Camp Kim bases had been linked to an oil spill." This claim should be cited given that it relays specific details of historical events, which should be verifiable. (under Contamination from Military Bases)

Organization

Overall, the content is well organized. However, I would make some grammatical edits and sentences more clear or concise.


 * The summary you provide at the beginning of your subsection is well done; its last sentence, though, could be made more concise by changing "for the ecosystems where they are located" to "for the ecosystems they are in."
 * Under your Impacts of Construction section,
 * I would change "has the potential to carry with it a number of environmental consequences" to "has the potential to carry a number of environmental consequences," removing "with it"
 * Where it says "which could change the biophysical processes of the ecosystem rendering it potentially uninhabitable," there should be a comma after "ecosystem"
 * Where it says "changing the dynamics of the host ecosystem which could have negative implications for biodiversity" there should be a comma after ecosystem and before which
 * Under your Contamination from Military Bases section,
 * Where it says, "which local peoples and ecosystems depend on at 958 times a safe level," there should be a comma before which
 * The following could be a bit clearer: "This increases the risk to surrounding wildlife of contracting several chronic health issues" I would change it to something like "This increases the risk of surrounding wildlife contracting several chronic health issues"
 * Under your Impacts from Training and Testing section,
 * The following sentence could be slightly unclear: "Explosive munitions destroy the land, the repeated firing of which can irreversibly change the nature of an ecosystem rendering it uninhabitable for some of its composite species." I would maybe change it to the following: "The repeated firing of explosive munitions can irreversibly change the nature of an ecosystem. Thus, this destruction renders the land uninhabitable for some of its composite species" if this gets at what you meant to say.
 * In "changes in soil composition—often to the detriment of the ecosystem—is commonplace," the "is" should be an "are"
 * Ensure "arial" is spelled as "aerial"
 * The following sentence could be slightly clearer: "Additionally, noise pollution is a common side-effect of military training activities, which is particularly problematic for the marine life which surrounds naval military bases." I would change it to "Additionally, noise pollution is a common side-effect of military training activities, particularly problematic for the marine life surrounding naval military bases.
 * Under your Beneficial Impacts section,
 * The following sentence could be slightly unclear: "Recently, Fort Bragg, a United States Forces Base located in North Carolina collaborated with conservationists to restore Red-Cockaded Woodpecker populations such that they are no longer considered endangered species." I would change it to: "Recently, Fort Bragg, a United States Forces Base located in North Carolina, collaborated with conservationists to restore Red-Cockaded Woodpecker populations. As a result, they are no longer considered endangered species."
 * Under your Adaptation Efforts section,
 * Where it says, "For example, the Offutt Air Force Base located in Nebraska, United States was victim to extreme flooding in spring of 2019" there should be a comma after Offutt Air Force Base and after United States
 * There should be a comma after "Currently"
 * The following sentence could be a bit more concise: "Bases with clean technology and looking to make improvements to data collection pertaining to climate change and environmental risks." I would remove "make improvements to" and use "improve data collection" instead.

Images and Media

A summary of environmental impacts is necessary to understanding military bases, so your addition will certainly be of value.
 * Well done on the images. They appear well-captioned, well-placed and adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.