User talk:Nacutler/sandbox

peer review
Hi,

After reading the deglaciation page the first thing that is noticeable is the length of the page, it is very short and it seems that a professional wikieditor would consider this article to be a stub. I would also search for more sources of information, given we have access to unlimited scholarly articles, there must be more then just one source of information that can be used to create this article. Not only will multiple sources help validate the information but it will likely also help with the length of the article. The Causes section of the article could use some work, it seems like you just described the ways that ice can melt rather then the root causes of why the glaciers are diispearing, is this due to global climate change? perhaps dark sediment from industrial processes has build up on the glaciers causeing them to absorb more heat? are there other theories that people think might be causing this?

This article could use a graphic, perhaps a satellite image showing the change in glaciers over a few years, or something like that. A graphic would help the page come together.

Over all the article is good, the writing style does seem to be written like a good wikipeida article, the language is accessible, but still informative. it is cited throughout the page, and linked to a number of other Wikipedia articles.

Miller.tod (talk) 16:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice. Also sorry I didn't have the full draft up yesterday, it's all up now if you want to take a look. -Nacutler (talk) 16:10, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review
You have expanded the original article quite well and I like that you have added the causes and effects for deglaciation. The first section is labelled as "background" however I feel as if it would be better divided into two sections: definition and history (and maybe expand the history section a little). The "Causes and Effects" section is a little messy and I feel like they should be divided into subheadings. Perhaps you could divide it into the following sections: climate change, volcanic activity, and oceanic processes. You mention physical mechanisms under the Causes section which could be a separate section where you expand on each section. I looked at each article you mentioned and they provide more general definitions so I think it would be helpful to understand how they are physical mechanisms in relation to deglaciation.

If you do merge "Isotasy" with "Causes and Effects", then I would suggest a subheading for it rather than incorporating it into the main paragraph. I think you should keep the occurrences section as it would be very interesting to actually see some evidence of deglaciation! I don't think a lot of information is needed (just the general when, where, and how) and maybe you could link to current wikipedia articles (if they exist). Your "Landforms" section is clear and I like that you provided many examples of landforms caused by deglaciation. I initially wanted to see some description after each example, however after looking at the individual articles, it is evident that they explain everything.

Overall, the article is well written and reads like a standard wikipedia article. My criticism is to divide the sections up a bit and make them clear. Also, if possible, it would be nice to see an animation or diagram of deglaciation.

Shreya.guru (talk) 15:20, 6 April 2015 (UTC)