User:Mymywg/Environmental impacts of animal agriculture-MW/Winter is coming567 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mymywg


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mymywg/Environmental impacts of animal agriculture-MW


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Environmental impacts of animal agriculture

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:

The individual chose to edit an existing article, which itself has no lead. Neither is there a lead in the draft of the user. However, in the sandbox, a segment was added stating the number of paragraphs that will be added to the original paper and where specifically (what section) they will be implemented. This made it easy to find the sections where the paragraphs will be placed and compare what has already been written in the article and the user's texts. Furthermore, the segment in question mentions further additions to be made in the future by the individual. Nonetheless, it may be an advantage for the article and helpful to the reader, for the user to produce a lead in the article when the time comes to transfer the edits from the sandbox to the paper.

Content:

The information presented in the draft is relevant and adds more insight, further examples and understanding of the situation at hand to the article. It also adds different aspects to the pre-existing content in the paper. For example, in the Water pollution section, the paper mentions the pollution of water via animal waste and the solution of implementing requirements to control and mitigate the problem. Mymywg pointed out that water pollution occurs also from the  excess fertilizer  used in  the growth of animal feed production .

The content is sourced mostly from papers that were written in 2010, with some dating from 1917, 1994, 2016 and 2020. Although, the majority are not recent (save the articles from 2016 and 2020), the problems that surged thirteen, fifteen years ago are still present in today's society and one would argue that they have worsen and may be more difficult in the coming future (ex: water pollution, air pollution, population > food supply).

Tone and Balance:

In terms of the tone regarding the paragraphs of the user, it is neutral. The content is not heavily biased toward a particular position and does not try to persuade the reader into a position or another. It simply states the reality and consequences of the actions and decisions that have been made.

Sources and References:

The information is backed up by relevant and working sources. The papers of the listed sources are, as stated in the Content segment, not all recent but nevertheless still applicable today. There is a fair amount of reliable sources with different authors and all are peer-reviewed articles and not news coverage or random website.

Organization:

The content is well written, easy to read and concise. The spelling and grammar are correct. The content is well organized and broken down into paragraphs under sub-sections and sections.

Images and Media:

None applicable

Overall Impressions:

Overall, the content completes or adds relevant information to the paper. It conveys insight in easy to read, concise paragraphs which are well organized into sub-sections and sections that are found in the actual paper. The tone is kept neutral throughout and there is a decent amount of reliable sources presenting different peer-reviewed paper written by diverse authors. Hence, the user did well in the writing, tone, content, sources and tone of the texts. In terms of improvement, the individual should add a lead to the article. When incorporating the edits in the article, it should be done in a manner where the information of the paper transitions smoothly to the content added by the individual (by the use of a phrase or word, for example: furthermore). In the end, the quality of the article will be improved once the edits are added.