User talk:HandN6043S/sandbox

Feedback
There is good factual evidence here to support your page, and you have done a very good job of documenting your references. There is content within the writing though that could use links to related Wikipedia pages if they exist. By linking content such as "The Hurricane & Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRRS)," "Army Corps of Engineers," "Gulf of Mexico," "Mississippi River," "Hurricane Rita," and "Gregory D. Steyer" you will expand the reader's understanding of your content. If a reader doesn't know what some of this content is or wants to look up further facts about them, links to other Wikipedia pages will give them a place to start.

As for grammar and structure, avoid phrases like, "Besides for effects on populated areas," This phrase is awkwardly worded and unnecessary to the sentence's overall meaning. Also, be more careful and thoughtful in your word choices. You want to avoid words that could imply any sort of a bias. In the sentence, "This lack of natural wetland restoration combined with the continued erosion form hurricanes causes a rapid loss in wetland area," the word "form" should be from. Make sure you are defining words such as "salinity" because the average reader may not understand what this term means. When you state "The Hurricane & Storm Damage Risk Reduction System," do not use the symbol "&". Instead, write the word out. Be standard in your use of numbers in the article. When you discuss the storm's category 1 status throughout the page you sometimes use the numeral "1" while other times you write out the word.

Overall, I think the sections and information that you have included so far are informative and well-organized. The sections you have contributed to the page provide the reader with good, factual evidence that was not present on the already existing page for Hurricane Isaac. Rosamevel (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Rose on everything she said. I think external links would be really helpful because some of the things like "The Hurricane & Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRRS)" is something I don't know a whole lot about and would want to learn about. An external link would be really helpful there. I also agree that some word choices may show bias, but I didn't see a lot of that. Lastly, the numbers by your references looked different than mine. I don't know if that is just the preview of it, but you should be able to click the number and be directed to the bottom of the page. I would look into why it isn't doing that. As a whole though, there was a lot of good information there and it was definitely an addition to what was already on the site! Kdowde3 (talk) 02:31, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Your facts and research appears to be adequate. There are a few grammatical errors, so read through carefully and edit. Like instead of 2064 you have "20604," and the phrase "large amounts of biodiversity" might be reworded. Besides that, talk about effects on human society if marshes are destroyed by salinity. Make predictions on what will happen if HSDRRS implements that new system; how much is it supposed to cost? Also, linking Hurricanes Katrina and Isaac is good, see if you can link other specific items throughout the text. Lastly, your references need to be formatted correctly. BHornsby (talk) 16:48, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Your peers have provided you with excellent feedback! Be sure to follow up on each suggestion. You may also considering specific parishes, Chandeleur Islands, and the Chenier Plain when linking content to your contribution. Cite all statements where a statistic is provided. There are several statements that need referenced support. I will be happy to assist you with reference formatting. Some statements read bias or opinionated. "...creation of wetlands in the first place." is one example that should be removed or rephrased. What is the human response to Hurricane Isaac? This aspect could be further developed. B.J.Carmichael (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)