User talk:Rwaggoner8/Stream bed
External Review[edit]
Hi Rwaggoner8 - My name is Jolie, and I'm the Project Coordinator for the WikiProject Limnology & Oceanography team. Your external reviewer for your article on "Stream bed" doesn't have a Wikipedia account, so I'm posting his review on his behalf. If you have any questions about your review, or would like to clarify anything, please feel free to contact your reviewer at the email he's provided below. Thanks, and all the best as you wrap up your Wikipedia editing assignment!
EXTERNAL REVIEW - Hi, my name is Robert Hensley and I am a scientist at the National Ecological Observatory Network. My research focus is on the transport and processing of carbon and nutrients in river networks. Rivers are the linkages controlling the flux of water, sediment and solutes between the terrestrial and marine environment. But they are not just inert pipes. Lots of uptake, storage, transformation and release occurs along the way.
I found the section to be well written and the information is properly cited. However, many of the sentences are long, often with multiple clauses. This sometimes made them difficult to understand the first time reading them. Try simplifying the wording and sentence structure. Similarly, try structuring the paragraphs with an opening topic sentence, followed by supporting sentences. I think this will make for a better reading experience. Below, you will find some more specific comments. But overall, I think this section will be a valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Job well done!
- “Positive” or “negative” effects on stream morphology may often depend on your perspective. Channelizing a stream can be seen as a “positive” effect from the perspective flood control or navigation, but a “negative” effect from the perspective of habitat and nutrient uptake. Dam construction, either by animals or humans, has the opposite effect, “negative” or “positive” depending on your perspective. Consider simply stating the effects of various modification without characterizing them as “positive” or “negative”.
- Similarly, in the last sentence of the first paragraph, it’s unclear why dams created by animals “advertently” have negative effects on the morphology of streams. While it’s true their actions are deliberate (i.e. beavers build dams), from their perspective the effects on morphology are positive (a pool forms for them to live in).
- At the beginning of the second paragraph, clarify what “The results decrease the nutrient supply to the stream, and the stability of the channel/bank” is referring to. The loss of riparian vegetation?
- Consider moving the sentence “The riparian vegetation plays an important factor in channel adjustments through inhibiting erosion and strengthening floodplain creation through increased levels of sedimentation.” To the beginning of the paragraph. It makes a better opening sentence. Then move on to how changes to riparian vegetation impact the stream morphology.
- Change first sentence of third paragraph to something like “The removal of naturally occurring debris such as wood can also impact the morphology of the stream”.
- It’s unclear what “in-channel restoration structures” in the last paragraph refers to. Restoration usually describes attempts to return the stream closer to its natural state, which is the opposite of what is described here. “Hydraulic control structures” is probably a better term for what is being described. But also adding a section about active restoration of channels back to their natural state might be a good addition to the article.
Hopefully this project has piqued your interest in Aquatic Ecology. If you have any questions about my comments, please feel free to contact me at hensley@battelleecology.org