User talk:Coycca Gonzales
| This user is a student editor in Soka_University_of_America/WRIT101-02_(Fall_2019) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Coycca Gonzales, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:09, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Peer Review by Randy (SirLladnar (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC))
[edit]Share the love SirLladnar (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
[edit]The article has several interesting graphs displaying water consumption, and it is very helpful to understanding countries water consumptions compared globally. I liked the table showing the foods that consumed the most water to grow, but I think there should be a ascending order/ descending order tool on the table to easily see what foods need the most water. I would like to see the "Water use in continents" expanded because I think it would be valuable in comparing water usage and trends among the continents and what specific problems each continent faces and the countries within.
Lead Section SirLladnar (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
[edit]The lead section effectively explains the basic idea of the water footprint. I think it would be helpful to make the comparison that the water footprint's idea is similar to the carbon footprint. Similar attempts at trying to quantify water used is mentioned and I think it is good that it is explained why the water footprint was adopted to replace past methods, and it is expressed in an unbiased manner. The lead both mentions positives and negatives of using the water footprint and it is effective in informing the reader of surface level information before specifics are introduced.
Reliable Sources SirLladnar (talk) 07:16, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
[edit]A source leads to a page not found and some are news articles, which should be reviewed for credibility. Overall, most sources are from reputable organizations such as the government websites, FAO, and EU, also many scholarly sources are used. The resources offer a good balance of views and reputable information.
Kyle Peer Review
[edit]The Lead is detailed and provides basically all of the information that is shown in the article, which is a great feature to have. It is a great explanation of the article as a whole and makes the rest of it an easier read. Although there is a lot of information in the article, it is well divided with the multiple sections and subsections that help the reader find their topic of interest. The user-friendly utility of the article is well done, and there is little room to be confused despite the size of the content. The references section is seasoned and really helps the article seem strong. On top of all of this, there is no bias to cloud the judgment of the article. Kylevillegas (talk) 07:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)