User:Sophbonn/Environmental issues in Thailand/Devashree818 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User:Sophbonn


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Sophbonn/Environmental issues in Thailand
 * User:Sophbonn/Environmental issues in Thailand/Bibliography


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Environmental issues in Thailand

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:


 * The Lead section doesn't seem like it needs to be changed as it has deforestation as part of it's lead sentence. This sentence also describes the content of the rest of the article as well so I think it provides enough information (even though you're adding a section, since it's under deforestation it doesn't seen necessary to specifically point out restoration efforts)

Content:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the section added, Mangrove Restoration Efforts, counterbalances the section before it which is Mangroves and Beach Erosion. It also works with it being under the overarching section on Deforestation. I also see ties into the other section with you mentioning fishing, land use, and aquaculture.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, it's within the past 15 years and most of the information is being cited from work published between 2014-2020 with one being from 2008.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think you have content that is missing but of the two sentences you wanted to use, "Mangrove wetlands are hypothesized to dampen the intensity of tsunami force " seems to not be as relevant to the topic because the lead paragraph doesn't mention climate change and the information is hypothesized. The other sentence seems to fit better in the Lead section as there is mention of degradation and depletion of resources threatening quality of life. In the same way, carbon cumulation threatens quality of life for example by air pollution and so on.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * I like that in your section you make sure to mention both the conservationists and coastal communities. You also describe the local government's approach alongside local communities towards mangrove restoration.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Seems to be written neutrally. For instance this sentence, "This initiative provides flexibility for local government to approach mangrove conservation efforts as they see fit, which has proved successful for communities in the Phuket, Phang Nga, and Trang provinces. " showed where it was successful and not that it was successful for all communities. -are there cases where it wasn't successful?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Coastal and conservationist communities are mentioned but there isn't information on whether their point of views have hindered or helped restoration efforts.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * There is a source cited for the new information added. There are also a variety of sources used so there is credibility and reliability in the information provided. It might be nice to have multiple sources citing similar information, at least for claims such as Mangroves dampening tsunami force or local government initiatives being successful.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * The information provided in the section is synthesized from the sources listed
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, there are a variety of sources and authors and content of each source differs as well, providing many perspectives
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, they are from 2008-2020 with most of them being more recent, 2014 and upwards.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * There are sources that are written by scholars of Asian ethnicity.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * All the sources used are published works in peer reviewed journals
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All the links work

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is easy to read and there's a clear structure of how mangroves provide economic opportunities and then clashing local perspectives and finally what efforts are being made and what can be done to help with restoration efforts.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * It's well worded and there aren't any spelling errors. However, the last sentence about PES seems to be worded a bit awkwardly. Maybe try, "however, lack of funds challenges wide scale support for PES and its implementation."
 * A section that read a bit oddly to me was "rely on private entities to assist restoration efforts financially." Maybe you could try "....private entities to fund restoration efforts".

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * It provides more information on mangroves and also adds information on how restoration efforts can be seen in southeast Asia. I also think it nicely counterbalances the previous section on mangrove and beach erosion.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * I liked that there is a flow of the section and that multiple perspectives are added.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Some slight reorganization may help with creating a more concise flow and perhaps more information on local communities. Overall, I think the sources complement the information and it's all relevant to the article. It might help to have more sources that share the same information to provide reliability. This is also something I realized I can do for my article as well.