User:Jriley97/sandbox

Each fact seems properly sourced, but not cited. The first citation is worded to closely to the original work I feel. The final sentence of the first paragraph uses dates and makes claims without backup, and the wording itself is not very professional. References in the ice core sections are particularly good.
 * Climate proxies

The article seems neutral, but I feel it may be slightly skewed to support an argument for global warming. It shouldn't be argumentative, rather factual.

All tested links work except for reference 15

Comments on Talk Page:

"Reference 15 under corals no longer works, or at least it doesn't direct you to a reference (Jriley97 (talk) 18:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC))"

"Nitpicky I know but the first sentence, specifically "In the study of past climates ('paleoclimatology')", is worded quite closely to the reference material. Perhaps rewording or reorganization of the sentence would help. (Jriley97 (talk) 19:02, 16 February 2017 (UTC))"

Wk3Pt5

Ice core

1) Compared to the definition of ice cores in Dessler as well as Bradley's input on paleoclimatology in general, the article on wikipedia gives a good basic description of cores, how they're harvested, and what data they potentially contain as well as how said data is used. It goes in depth as well, discussing the various aerosols such as ash and pollen that can be found in ice cores. The article pointed out that air still circulates in top-layer snow, making the ice age different from the air age in the same part of the sample. This is a point that I haven't come across until now, but makes sense, and the sources confirm it.

Key points:
 * Data Analysis: The page discusses how the data can be affected by water percolation as well as air circulation, and these are important to account for when analyzing data. There is a whole subsection of the page detailing the many data sets you can find in ice cores and how they correlate with climatic conditions of the past and present.
 * Assumptions: The article does state that snow fall and temperatures vary, even in close regions, clarifying that the assumption of ice cores being near perfect captures of the past is wrong. Also, the article discusses the various ways cores become contaminated, addressing the assumption that proper care should be taken when handling cores to prevent said contamination.
 * Strengths and Weaknesses: The article points out several strengths, key among them being that cores are the most abundant climate proxies available as well as how they record natural events like forest fires as well as atmospheric conditions. A major weakness of course is the limited availability of ice cores to colder regions and the potential for partial thawing from warm periods in the areas history. Another weakness brought up is the destruction of reliable data when meltwater percolates into the ice and snow on warmer days. Furthermore, the air circulation in the top layers means the data from air samples cannot be dated to the same time as when the ice was formed

2) Article 1: "Annually Resolved Ice Core Records of Tropical Climate Variability over the Past ~1800 Years", Science, does not appear on the article page

Article 2: "Changes in environment over the last 800,000 years from chemical analysis of the EPICA Dome C ice core", Quaternary Science Reviews, does not appear on the article page

3) Suggestions: The line in the article "The gas age–ice age difference is as great as 7 kyr in glacial ice from Vostok" is lifted directly from the source, no paraphrasing or quoting. Also, clarify what a kyr is as the average reader may not infer it means kiloyear. Much of the paleoatmospheric sensing section is cited improperly with in text citations.