User talk:MarkYWells

Welcome!

Hello, MarkYWells, 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
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:34, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Week 3 Feedback

Hi Mark, Good job introducing yourself and finding good sources. When writing in talk pages, please create a New Section for new topics that you are talking about. For example, last week, when you introduced yourself, you should have started a new section titled something like "Student Editor Introduction". Good work so far. KHillWells (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Week 7 Feedback

Hi Mark, I am happy to see you editing. I see that you added a whole new section to the article, which is great. I like that you are keeping notes for yourself in the sandbox. I think that helps.

Lead section

This section is good, and I see that you have added to it. I am not sure about the "lacks flowing water" part. Maybe double check that. As far as I understand it, there is no reason that there should be no flowing water. Many palustrine wetlands are stream fed and on the side or rivers.

Characteristics of Palustrine Wetlands section

I am happy to see that you added this section. I would change the name to "Classification". In this section i would introduce Mr. Cowardin and the whole classification system that was developed by him and his co-authors because this is where the word Palustrine comes from, from them. I think, overall, you are a little confused about the definition of a Plustrine wetland and should go back to that document and keep reading it. I know that it is complicated. Believe me, I have stared at that document for many hours to try to makes sense of it, so I understand. But you cane figure it out. The four characterists that you mention are described for non-vegetated Palustrine wetlands. Classically, Palustrine wetlands are dominated by vegetation. Also, the five categories of wetlands are actually called Systems so please use the correct terminology. This section could be expended for sure. As you read and re-read that one document, you can explain it better to the reader. You are doing a lot of good work here and the information will be helpful to many confused people who are wondering what the heck a Palustrine wetland is. I would also break down the Palustrine system into its Emergent, Forest, and Shrub-Scrub classes and talk about each of those

Reference section

Reference 1, 3, and 4 are all the SAME reference so please edit this section to reflect that. There should technically be just 2 references here. The Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats is that Cowardin report and this is where the word Palustrine was born. This will be your MAIN reference.

It's hard to decide what other sections to add because this is a very specific topic, but since this wetland system is so strongly dominated by vegetation, I would add a section on vegetation and what types can be found here.

I gave you a little to work with. Remember to publish your changes frequently when you edit and every time you do, write a summary of what you did, so that someone can follow along. When you answer any of my comments here, make sure to use the colon to start your answer. This will indent your text so it can be easily differentiated from mine. Good luck KHillWells (talk) 17:16, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Week 8 Peer Review

Hey Mark,

• I don't really know how much content should be included in this, but maybe talk about the hydrology of Palustrine Wetlands or give some examples of them around the world.
• I see the Cowardin classification system is referenced, maybe put in a chart of some sort with the the sub-groups of the Palustrine category

SjminarikWells (talk) 20:02, 23 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KHillWells (talk • contribs)

Week 8 Peer Review

Hi Mark!

Overall your first section discussing what Paulustrine wetlands are contains a lot of good information, but I suggest that it gets reorganized in a way that would help the reader follow along and understand what you are trying to say. The first sentence and initial definition in this section describes what Palustrine wetlands are, which is good, but the one thing I would consider is shortening the part of the definition talking about ocean derived salts. This part should still be included, maybe just stating "contains ocean-derived salts", and going into depth about the concentrations in the Characteristics of Palustrine Wetlandswhich you already began to do. Paulustrine wetlands are a broad category so listing all of the subcategories within it (marsh, swamp, bog...) is useful. As for the rest of this section, its contents are valid and important to include, but reorganizing it a little bit will only help clarify the point you are trying to make. It goes back and forth between the topics of vegetation and location of these wetlands and i think grouping them together/combining the similar sentences together will help with the flow of information.

Good additional information was added to the Characteristics of Palustrine Wetlands section, describing what makes a Palustrine wetland. You may want to go into depth about each of the charectoristics you mentioned, maybe explaining them more. Also check for spelling errors and fluidity of your sentences (3rd sentence in this section).

Make sure to keep adding sources to help you expand on this topic some more.

Overall it's looking good though! Gasawyer17 (talk) 18:47, 23 October 2019 (UTC)Gabby Sawyer

Hi Gabby! Thanks so much for the review, you gave me a lot of information that I can definitely build on. I definitely plan on adding more to the characteristics. I will also try to find a couple more sources to widen the information I have. Thanks!

MarkYWells (talk) 13:45, 24 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KHillWells (talk • contribs)