User:Marissarp/Lake Constance/DanielleNabor Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?
 * Marissarp


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


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marissarp/Lake_Constance?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

I would define eutrophication for the reader so they understand right off the bat.

When you get your information from sites, add the citation number at the end of the sentence to give them credit for the information

Maybe expand on bottom up effect? When you throw terms in there that are not commonly known It can make the reading confusing

I would explain oligotrophication as well to help understand the importance of “re”oligicotrophication of the lake

You discuss the increase of phytoplankton increases zooplankton and then the growth of whitefish, maybe explain how this works of the food chain first to clarify?