User talk:Jonathanhoffmann225

Feedback
This article is very well written! You did extensive research and it shows. Great job--no major errors! Bharve9 (talk) 17:59, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

The only thing I would suggest is using some more references. You use numbers and statistics in multiple areas that don't have a reference. However, your external links are very useful and in appropriate places and your article was written without bias from what I saw. Kdowde3 (talk) 02:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I am only seeing "Historical Flooding" and "Aid." I know you have more information than this, so I was waiting to post feedback. BHornsby (talk) 15:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

B.J.Carmichael Feedback
The contribution is organized, but limited and needs more development. Continue to add information about the flood itself, the disturbances of the area, and human effects. Be sure to include peer-reviewed science references to support ideas, as your peers have suggested. Also review the writing to be sure it is free of bias/is neutral. I would move your contribution to your sandbox as well. Currently the article and this feedback are on your User Page. B.J.Carmichael (talk) 21:30, 6 November 2013 (UTC)