User talk:Elasticat/sandbox

Ethan343's Peer Review
There are ample background information and reasoning provided that explain what the article is missing and why an environmental impacts section needed to be added. I like the idea of broadening the scope of the page to encompass more of a global perspective and you should add to that if possible. I like the idea of getting discussions going in the talk page. The structure of the added sections is good and easy to follow. The coverage of the added sections is good. Maybe you could add more about what remediation measures are being implemented by the Australian sources and expand from there, adding a sort of subsection on Fracturing and Water Quality on remediation. The content that is ready to be added to the article now is good but could be expanded. There is tons of content present but most of it is just in notes, which is not necessarily a bad thing as this is just a rough draft. There are many quality sources which are all reliable and have been carefully selected to avoid bias. Citations are properly added.
 * Lead Section
 * Structure
 * Coverage
 * Content
 * Source Reliability

--Ethan343 (talk) 22:43, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review Response
Ethan mentions that adding global perspectives are a good idea to add. I will look into this more and I have found a source that is a news article for longwall mining on an international level so I hope to use that in the environmental impacts beyond canada.https://www.miningmagazine.com/tag/longwall

This too is part of what can be covered with how Ethan mentioned I should add a Frectuing and Water Quality section. I can edit the environmental impacts section to separarte frecturing from subsidents and Water quality.

Ethan mentions that my content is in a lot of note-based formats, which I intend to expand on as the deadline for next week approaches. I will be adding and elaborating on what I have already written, so I am not too concerned about having things in note-based format.

Also, my references were evaluated to seem reliable and unbiased, so I am happy with that, and I will continue with my searching process in finding references for the project. Elasticat (talk) 04:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)