User talk:Kerres/Sandbox

First review

After a first reading I would suggest the following improvements to the article to bring it to a B-class rating for the WikiProject water supply and sanitation:

Substance and structure

So far the section on external cooperation is incomplete. Given the importance of donors for the sector, it would be very useful to complete it at least partially. The web sites of the agencies mentioned should have a lot of information in this respect.
- Added some information on World Bank and GTZ activities. Unfortunately, I could not find more detailed information on the other projects. Kerres (Talk) 13:34, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right now the section on history and recent developments is simply a chronological listing of three key documents with a description of the content of the documents. It may be useful to rewrite the section so that it includes key events in the sector, some of which are mentioned later in the article. These include the creation of PWA; the creation and (non-) functioning of the Joint Water Committee; the signing, implementation and expiry of management contracts for Gaza and the Southern West Bank; the creation of the Coastal Municipal Water Utility in the Gaza Strip; and the damage and reconstruction of water and sanitation infrastructure after various rounds of conflicts, to name just a few. Writing such a section will not be easy. But, if well done, it would significantly improve the article.
- Added basic information and a short paragraph on the creation of the PWA. --Kerres (Talk) 13:34, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest to limit the section on responsibilities in the sector on what the situation is at this moment, and keep the history in one place in the history section.
Most of the content of the current section on history could be moved to a new section on the legal and policy framework.
- Good points --Kerres (Talk) 13:34, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In a new history section, I would suggest to add the duration of the management contracts in Gaza (since 1996, I believe) and Bethlehem (since 1999, I believe), which have both expired. Information is available in the Implementation Completion Reports for both projects: website:http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P051564

http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=64283627&piPK=73230&theSitePK=40941&menuPK=228424&Projectid=P040505

- Done --Kerres (Talk) 14:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please name the three utilities in the West Bank. You may want to include more information on them, esp. on JWU in Ramallah, which was (is?) considered to be one of the best utilities in MENA:

http://www.jwu.org/newweb/index.php

- I restructured the whole section and included more information. Unfortunately the situation concerning sanitation is not as clear as for water supply. --Kerres (Talk) 14:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure how accurate the following statement is: “95% of the trans-boundary groundwater resources originating in the West Bank are being used and over-exploited by Israel and its settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories, leaving 5% of increasingly saline water resources to the Palestinians” The UN source quoted does not provide a reference or specific numbers to back up the statement. I would suggest to check the numbers, and if the numbers do not add up – as I would expect – take that statement out and rather keep the following statement in the article: “Currently, more than 85% of the Palestinian water from the West Bank aquifers is taken by Israel, accounting for 25% of Israel's water needs.”
- I removed the statement because I was not able to access the corresponding UN document. In addition the document was from the year 1992 and might not give accurate information for 2009.

Form and style

When quoting larger documents it would be very useful to add page numbers, e.g. in the publication by the Heinrich-Boell-Foundation (HBF), so that readers can find the actual reference.
Wherever primary sources are available, it is preferable to quote the primary sources instead of a secondary source. The heavily quoted HBF publication is an example. This secondary source relies on primary sources, but unfortunately includes very few references, so that it is impossible to find out which primary source a specific piece of information is derived from.
It would be useful to include hyperlinks to key documents such as the NWP, the Water Resources Management Strategy and the Water Law, if these documents are available on-line.
While I edited the article to some extent for style and grammar, it may be useful if a native English speaker edited the entire article concerning these aspects.

Miscellaneous

To my knowledge, municipal per capita water use is much higher in the Gaza Strip than in the West Bank. It would be useful to include figures on this, if available.
- Included figures for the year 2005
The article states how many wastewater treatment plants exist in the West Bank. It would be useful to add the number for Gaza.
- Named the treatment plants in the West Bank and added the number for Gaza. Could not find the names for Gaza.
Some background on the “current” (?) amendment of the Water Law could be included.
“lack of sewerage in the West Bank and Gaza led to a high amount of untreated wastewater which is discharged”. This sentence is unclear. If there is no sewer network, wastewater is not being discharged, but typically infiltrates to the ground through septic tanks or latrines. Septic tanks can also discharge small quantities of partially treated wastewater to the environment, if they are designed to do so. Untreated discharge of high amounts of wastewater occurs if there is a sewer network without wastewater treatment.
- Changed the sentence. The untreated wastewater has nothing to do with the sewerage system.
“total cost of water projects from 1996 to 2002 amounted to about US$ 500 million, out of which the total implemented cost is 150 million.” It is not clear if the $500m are only plans, and only $150m have actually been invested. Please clarify.
- Done.
There is no hyperlink to the EMWIS country report on Palestine. Could it be added?
- Done.
If it is not too much of an effort, please add the dates when each of the listed on-line sources has been accessed.--Mschiffler (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Updated all references.

Thanks for all the useful comments and suggestions! I will include them in the article within the next days and weeks! Kerres (Talk) 18:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. I saw that you already starting incorporating some of the suggested changes. Looking forward to reading the other changes.--Mschiffler (talk) 19:58, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]