User talk:Veena.narashiman/sandbox

Gianna's Peer Review
Hi Veena! I was assigned to look through your articles. Here are my edits/thoughts!

In the lead: I would suggest to add exactly what the WHO's recommended limit is for arsenic levels in water? Maybe add this in the lead, because a lot of the article refers to WHO's limit, but for someone who isn't very knowledgeable on the subject I think this would be helpful for me to know for reference.

I would replace "in fact" with "according to ___ (the study in Bangladesh that found this method the most effective)" in this sentence:

"In fact, using iron electrocoagulation to remove arsenic in water proved to be the most effective treatment option. [7]"

This way you are staying neutral by writing what a specific organization has found to be the most effective option, and not stating this matter-of-factly, because I would assume that other organizations/groups hold that a different option is the best one.

I find the Fe-EC solution quite interesting and hope to read more about it as you keep synthesizing! It would be helpful to include the drawbacks/limitations to this method, and maybe briefly describe how Bangladesh used it/what worked/what did not. Also, I am not sure if this is intended or not, but the diagram that you provided a link to does not work. I think this was a really awesome idea to add a diagram so I'd try to get this link to work/add a new one!

In terms of cleaning up the article's structure: Under "small scale" and "large scale" treatments, I would make the bolded words (ex: Coagulation/filtration, Iron oxide adsorption/ion exchange, etc.) into sub-headings under each larger heading (Large- & small-scale treatments) so that they are more clearly layed out and that way they will appear in the article's table of contents.

Your specific example about San Joaquin Valley's city Tulare definitely piqued my interest, so I think your plan (you mentioned this in Selecting possible articles section) to "delve into specific regions" is a good one. I'd give more info on Tulare, because as a reader I want to know more about this.

Your area article is definitely thorough in many aspects, but I don't see too much about the contamination of water. This gives you a lot of room to add your own information. I think it would be helpful to give background as to the origins of this contamination, and why/how some areas are more polluted than others.

Also, I know that there is a link to another article "arsenic poisoning", but something to think about: I'd like to know from your sector article why arsenic is so bad in the first place. Maybe add more apparent links to "arsenic poisoning" throughout the article, or add a brief explanation somewhere in this article about the effects.

Everything looks really good though! What you've synthesized so far sounds really professional and unbiased while keeping my interest. Good luck with the rest of your editing! gmousalimas (talk)

Peer Review - Jeshua
Hi Veena,

Here are some of my thoughts, although a little late, I hope they are still helpful!

Arsenic contamination of groundwater

The lead to this article is straight to the point, but I would say that "often due to naturally occurring high concentrations of arsenic in deeper levels of groundwater" isn't very clear about why it happens in some areas and not others. Adding a sentence or two to clarify how prevalence is determined could be helpful, maybe answer the question "if it is naturally occurring, why isn't it a problem everywhere?". Is it geographically-determined?

It also may be beneficial to add to the lead something like "Prolonged exposure to arsenic causes arsenic poisoning that leads to ... and ... if not treated through ...". I don't think many people actually know how serious it is for the specific people affected, who have this reality as part of their daily lives. This also prompts the possibility of adding a "Treatment and medical care" section detailing what happens when people are affected, and depending on how much time you have, maybe even a "symptoms and signs" of arsenic poisoning section? How is this diagnosed? How do communities typically find out about it?

Under "Speciation of arsenic compounds in water", I would add what the specific WHO recommended limit, or other standards of measurement and how the measurement is done. That way these measurements can be used as a good reference and benchmark throughout the article. Alternatively, you could add a new section titled "Methods of measurement", or something similar.

I believe it would be neat to have "Contamination specific nations and regions" ordered by worst spread of contamination to the nation/region with the least bad spread of contamination. I can't tell if there is already a current method to the order. I also wonder if there can be more order to the "India and Bangladesh" section, is it a shared geographical region that has these two countries lumped together, is there a way to structure this more clearly, maybe start with India, then Bangladesh, and finally the shared regions that are affected in both India and Bangladesh? Again, depending on how this reads to you it may give the article a better flow.

Under "Chile" I would add the specifics about the study/research done, urine as bio-marker for exposure? In that case, I would state "testing of urine was conducted to estimate/understand exposure" this gives the reader more detail/cuts out ambiguity. This approach can also add more scientific information that gives more balance to the article.

I really think you have done a good job, I do believe this page is going to be very useful for people attempting to understand the issue more extensively.

Water in California

The lead here looks good, I don't think there is anything that 100% needs to be changed, but if you wanted to, you could add a one sentence on water purity if aside from drought that is the only major concern in California, if there are others like indigenous people's rights to water etc. (I don't know enough), then it might require more work.

The article seems a lot more developed than the "Arsenic contamination of groundwater" article. Side note, under "uses of water" are there ceremonial uses, or other areas that are not touched on? Maybe you will come in contact with something like this.

I like what you have done with the "safety concerns", I almost feel like it could be its own section. I think you could also go into more detail with explaning what specifically about "Aging infrastructure", or other elements is making it worse/not helping with the issue. Also because I am not as familiar with the subject, I would like to know what is constitutes as "quality violation(s)". As a reader, I am interested to know what "contaminated water supply" fully means--are there different types of contamination in these areas, or is it roughly the same? How is it contaminated? Potentially even giving a sense of a timeline of the issue and if it has gotten better in the past, or is just slowly getting worse.

I like what you did with this area "The U.S. Geological Survey analyzed the results of a 2002 study of 10 streams in California and discovered that the Sacramento River had the highest traces of acetaminophen, cholesterol and birth control hormones of any water source in the nation." This is alarming but very good information. It also has the breakdown of what "pollutants" are present. This leads me to ask where the "pollutants" originate from, is there any information/studies on that?

I think it is great that you are not only working on this article, and doing the work you are for your PE. All too often people look past developed world problems, and just want to go to the developing world. As a new-ish resident of California, I appreciate the work you are doing.

JeshuaKJohn (talk)

JeshuaKJohn (talk) 02:26, 30 March 2018 (UTC)