User talk:570bcs/sandbox

Hi- your edits look really good. I think you're staying within the scope of the original article and maintaining a good flow of similar language. I'm looking forward to reading the final, complete article. 570kkl (talk) 16:49, 6 November 2017 (UTC)570kkl

Greetings, I am very impressed with your additions. They are very necessary and insightful as the current thread on manure management is very incomplete in its current state. I would recommend adding more information on the history of manure management and injection something on why and how it is relevant and necessary to have a manure management plan. There will be a diverse reader base and they will not have the insights that traditional livestock owners or agriculturalists will. Below is a link from the NRCS website on manure management, I would strongly urge you to consider expanding your current edits as you are well on your way to having a very in-depth article revision.

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/plantsanimals/mnm/

Additionally, if below is a link that focuses on the benefits of applying hydrogen sulfide for commodity crops. It is an article that was published online through the National Center for Biotechnology Information. This article links nutrient management and provides some insight as to why agriculturalists apply fertilizers.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3629089/

Lastly, here is a link from the Minnesota's Department of Agriculture. This will be another worthwhile link as it should provide additional insights for you on how manure management relates to natural resource conservation.

https://www.mda.state.mn.us/protecting/conservation/practices/manuremgmt.aspx Rebur (talk) 17:48, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

This seems like a much needed page and I am surprised there isn’t already something on it. The page seems fairly general if this is supposed to be tied specifically to manure management. It may be helpful to add more specific manure management information into your sections to show the correlation. I would maybe change the title “Sources” to “Sources of Hydrogen Sulfide”. When I read “Sources” I was thinking “References” but super minor detail. I would maybe break up this sentence as it is a bit wordy and becomes hard to follow – “In a study examining the concentration of hydrogen sulfide in a residential cohort it was reported the levels never exceeded the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry acute exposure MRL of 70 ppb and only 14 readings at 1 minute intervals reported levels above the intermediate exposure MRL of 20 ppb[ “. You may want to define what “the typical odor threshold” means. Are there people more at risk for acute or chronic exposure? How would a person have chronic exposure to H2S? Are there only limits set for H2S in workplaces? In the section for “Regulations for exposures”, you may want to define what “general industry” means more than just “ie agriculture”. What does “general industry” entail or who does it involve? It might be interesting to add how many people are impacted by acute or chronic H2S exposure on an annual basis or how many people are treated for H2S treatment. Make sure to use the title and header formatting also make sure references in wiki are set up with the correct formatting so that it develops your reference section for you. 570mna (talk) 23:29, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

The before and after page so far are like night and day- you have made a substantial improvement already on this topic. I think adding a section on actual recommendations for managing manure to mitigate the hydrogen sulfide exposure would be important- perhaps you are already working on that. But well done so far. 570rlg (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Your content explains the issue of hydrogen sulfide poisoning from pumping animal manure and beef. Hydrogen sulfide is a gas that is flammable. Its smell is also bad. Your content systematically presents the risk that human beings face when they are exposed to it and its effects. It is clear content whose organized structure enhances comprehension. I think that anybody who is interested in understanding the various details about hydrogen sulfide would find your draft sufficiently helpful. The information that this substance is flammable creates significant awareness in the readers, who have to treat it carefully. I think your draft should have included a section on the first aid procedures for those who are affected by the acute effects of this substance. 570iya (talk) 06:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)570iya

Hey there, I think your edits look really good. The relevance of your topic is fitting and you did a good job following the risk assessment guidelines. Your effects section is thorough and stating regulations helps readers have a baseline to follow. You did a good job blending your comments with the original article as well. As others have stated, a little more background may be helpful to the article as a whole. Otherwise, great job, I can't wait to see the finished product. -570alp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 570alp (talk • contribs) 23:42, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Your layout looks very professional and I like the flow of your sub-categories. One thing I noticed is that the sentence talking about the smell of H2S is kind of hard to read the way it is written, one other way of wording that sentence could be "H2S has a characteristic rotten egg smell which, though pungent at first, can quickly deaden the sense of smell." I hope that still conveys the message you were trying to get across. Are there any current recommendations to avoid H2S exposure accidents? If there are I think that might be worth researching and adding to the article for potential readers. Once thought that I had while reading your article is that if H2S tends to stick close to the ground, maybe placing detectors close to the ground would prove to be more beneficial than other heights that they might mistakenly get placed. Great information so far! 570cjd (talk) 04:10, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Your layout is well-done, and I think the edit will fit nicely within the topic article you noted. I only have two suggestions, and these are simply grammatical. In the first paragraph (I think), you have a spelling error, I think you wrote "hydrosulfic acid", which I believe should be "hydrosulfuric acid". Then in your last paragraph, you have the words "though" and "through" in sequence. It may flow better to simply eliminate the word "though", and just describe the route without the emphasis word. I also like that your addition places an emphasis on the risk to humans from H2S. Your comprehension of the assignment and the overall "jist" of the class is evidently high. Very good job :) 570hjm (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)570hjm