User talk:C nguyen143/Agricultural pollution

Peer Review
The Article draft does a great job at introducing what it's about along with what problems it discusses. Talks about the biggest issues regarding agricultural pollution in enough detail. Helping the reader understand exactly what it is they're reading about. It does a great job explaining the health risks which come with pollution. My only real criticisms are how a few times, it's slightly biased with it's wording. Even if it wasn't intentional. Phrases like "it can even" and "that should be". Although these are rare and don't take away from the message or information being demonstrated. The Bibliography looks great. All the sources are clearly shown and reliable. All new information added is also backed up by one of said sources. Another thing I noticed is how there isn't much of an order or flow to the article. Although it hasn't covered everything yet. It's more like a summary, introducing the reader to a sample of information that would normally get it's own section or paragraph. I would say it would be best to split up the current information that's there into 3 or 4 sections. Even if each section only has 1 or 2 sentences right now. Since you can just continue to add on to them with more time. Until every topic/section is covered with more depth. Msowerby (talk) 15:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)