User:Krone035/Low-Nutrient, Low-Chlorophyll (LNLC) Regions/Lingcod8 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Tenshorts, Roag98, Laurelceleste22, Beepbeep97, Krone035


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Krone035/Low-Nutrient,_Low-Chlorophyll_(LNLC)_Regions?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * New article

Lead

 * I think the lead was clear and concise and sets up the reader well for what is to follow.
 * I would recommend adding more citations in the lead to ensure that all information is properly accredited, but this may be in the works! Also, a sentence or two on theories that cause LNLC areas could be useful, or maybe a sentence on why we care about these regions at all.
 * I really like the sentence that contrasts LNLC with HNLC areas, because that distinction could definitely be a point of confusion for many readers.

Content

 * I think the content is wonderful. All sections definitely add to the reader's understanding of LNLC areas.
 * I really love the use of references to other sections (e.g., in the Productivity and Nutrient cycling section when the reader is directed to the monitoring section) and think that really improves the continuity and flow of the article.
 * I'm not sure if this is known, but it would be great to include mechanisms or theoretical mechanisms in the "Changes to LNLC Regions". For instance, why are the gyres expanding? Any potential ideas or do people just not know yet? If there's space & time, it would also be useful to briefly explain what ENSO and PDO are, or at least link to those Wiki pages. Similarly, it would be great to note potential effects of being phosphorous-limited, as you mention in the Mediterranean Sea section.
 * I would recommend ensuring consistency in section/sub-section titles, some are capitalized like titles, others are capitalized a bit differently... I'm sure this will be done in the final draft but worth noting!

Tone and Balance

 * I really think the article reads like a continuous, well-written paper on these regions. I think the tone is objective and consistent, and the content is well-balanced.
 * I think the importance of individual monitoring stations could be added to a bit, but also this is a draft so this may be in the works! If additional information is not available, I still think the representation of how LNLC areas are monitored is effective.

Sources and References

 * I think the number of sources and spread of their information is great, but I would recommend adding more citations after more sentences to ensure that nothing seems unattributed. There are some sentences without citations, which is okay for connected thought, but might be too ambiguous for Wikipedia (not positive of this). Never hurts to be super explicit with sources!
 * I would double check that all in-text citations are formatted the same way. I've noticed some numbers that come after the period, while others come before.. just make sure this is all consistent!
 * Y'all have a TON of sources, which I think is great!

Organization

 * I honestly wouldn't change anything about the organization. I think it flows really well, is clear, and logical.

Images and Media

 * I really like the images included, and besides their aesthetic value I think the captions are also really informative and tie back to the content of the article really well. The only thing I would recommend is linking terms to associated Wiki articles in the captions, but otherwise they're really informative.

New Article Considerations

 * The article is certainly impactful, I was surprised to learn it hadn't previously existed. I think the breadth and extent of articles to reference is exceptional.
 * I think this group has done a great job of modelling their new article after other Wiki articles - there are certainly adequate resources, it follows the Wiki style, is objective and impactful, and includes hyperlinks to Wiki articles and images.
 * It may be useful to include a "See Also" box at the bottom that links to maybe gyres, HNLC areas, primary productivity... or other related topics.

Overall Impressions

 * I think the article is exceptionally clear, well-written, and well-structured. I think this team is in great shape and I learned a lot from reading this article. I had no idea that the North Atlantic gyre is expanding!