Wikipedia:Peer review/Everglades/archive1

Everglades

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This is a LONG article, but necessary to be comprehensive. I am looking for input in the following issues:

Flow: the text flows and connects well
Originality: I added to this article by creating four other articles. Some of the information in those articles is here, either cut and pasted in chunks, or in similar sentences. I don't want readers to be faced with the same prose from another article to this one
Comprehensiveness: the region's boundaries, geology, ecology, and history are thoroughly explained

I would like to take this article to FA. Thank you for reading it. Moni3 (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs edit

In terms of lead length... you have to discuss the overall summary, the formation and ecosystem, history up to modern day. Looking at the lead, which is quite tangling, I suggest summarizing the middle two paragraphs of history into one (trimming down on the natives part, and then some of the "white man" stuff afterwards. But not too much. After all, 'tis a long article, it just needs to be a little more accessible. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also for the beginning... the prairie image isn't really representative of the region as a whole, I think, or at least encapsulating it. I like having a map to show where it is, its scope, but this too doesn't give all the scope of the topic. Perhaps two images? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk)

Ok. I appreciate your comments and I'm thinking about them, particularly the lead. I don't know about the opening images. Are you suggesting the map and the sawgrass prairie image? --Moni3 (talk) 17:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just think that the map is helpful for an at-a-glance "ok, what is this article about, where is it" approach, but I also like a representative image, because that is in a way better at summing up the entire article. It's up to you which you think is better. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Cryptic C62 edit

I couldn't resist :)

"This 5,000-year-old geologic and ecological formation" This is fairly ambiguous. Lots of things are formations. What is the Everglades?
"The name refers to the..." This sounds like you're trying to say "Everglades literally means..." However, the rest of the sentence isn't really etymology.
"It is such a unique convergence of land, water, and climate that the use of singular and plural to refer to the Everglades is appropriate." As interesting as this factoid may be, it is totally misplaced in its current location. It awkwardly breaks up the opening discussion of Okeechobee and Kissimmee.
"moving southward across a nearly flat limestone shelf" Does nearly flat mean almost smooth? Or does it mean slightly angled? How close is nearly flat to flat?
The first paragraph begins by using Everglades as a singular. The second paragraph begins by using Everglades as a plural. For the sake of consistency and logical word flow, I suggest using it as a plural in every case.
"formed by the presence and quality of water" Can something actually be formed by the quality of water? I'm not clear on what you're trying to say here.
"The sawgrass marshes and freshwater sloughs are a part of a complex system of interdependent ecosystems that include cypress swamps, the estuarine mangrove forests of the Ten Thousand Islands, tropical hardwood hammocks, pine rockland, and the marine environment of Florida Bay." Are all of these ecosystems part of the Everglades? Or are just the first two included and the rest are nearby?
The yellow squiggle in the first image doesn't enclose anything, and it certainly doesn't give the reader any idea of where Florida Bay is.
"People began living in the southern portion of the peninsula" Which peninsula? This is the first mention of any peninsulas so far.
Who were the combatants in the Seminole Wars? While the article mentions the U.S. military, it never clearly states which side they were on (if any).
"The Seminole Wars gave the U.S. military the opportunity to map features in the Everglades that had not previously been recorded." How is it that the U.S. military was unable to map the Everglades until after they had forced the Seminoles into the region? Had the Seminoles been setting up anti-cartographer blockades up until this point?
Drainage was suggested in 1848 and preliminary studies were done" By whom?
"...attracting developers and railroads" A railroad is an inanimate object. It has no feelings of attraction.
"A candidate for governor of Florida in 1904" Which one? Broward?
"...when the C-38 canal that straightened the Kissimmee River began to be backfilled" What does backfilled mean? Is it part of the restoration process? Or is it the reason that restoration began?
"cattle grazing areas formed by the canal returned to 40,000 acres" Returned from what? Their previous size was never mentioned, so it's unclear if they're growing or shrinking here.
"a significant concern for Lake Okeechobee and South Florida's water source." What is South Florida's water source? Is it Okeechobee, or something else?
"and if the natural balance was not restored" Which things need balancing? The food chain? pH levels? The economy? The hardwood hammocks?
"but the same politics and divisive interests that had affected the region for the previous 50 years have compromised the plan, which may be eliminated." What is being eliminated here, the plan or the divisive interests?

There's the intro for you. More to come. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The NASA map that opens the article I'm thinking of replacing. I think a photo of the area might be more appropriate and the map might be better placed elsewhere in the article. Otherwise, I made changes you suggested. --Moni3 (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The first appearance of the Everglades was on Spanish maps" Not sure that appearance is the right word. Maybe documentation or record?
"the Indians represent [the Southern points] as impenetrable; and the [British] surveyors, wreckers, and coasters, had not the means of exploring beyond the borders of the sea coast, and the mouths of rivers". Did you edit in those comments, or did McMullen? I ask because "Southern points" is a totally unfamiliar phrase to me, so I'm wondering what it would have replaced.
"A British surveyor mapping the coast of Florida in the 1700s" Very ambiguous. Any idea who or when?
"Both Marjory Stoneman Douglas and linguist Wallace McMullen suggest that "River" turned into "Ever" by cartographers" That you felt compelled to reference two authors suggests to me that there isn't consensus on the matter. Consider including alternate theories if there are any.
"it was also spelled as two words, "Ever Glades", as late as 1851. ... although appeared as "Ever Glades" throughout the Seminole Wars." According to Seminole Wars, the Third Seminole War lasted from 1855 to 1858, well past the date asserted by the first statement. Should the second statement refer only to the First and Second Seminole Wars? Or is 1851 incorrect?
The first two sentences of Geology seem to be a suitable introduction to the section. I don't really see how the geological history of Florida is relevant to the rest of the article.
"There are four geologic formations that make up the southern portion of Florida: the Tamiami Formation, Anastasia Formation, Miami Limestone (or Miami Oolite), and the Ft. Thompson Formation." Why were the Caloosahatchee Formation and the Key Largo Limestone not included in the list of four Formations? Also, why is it that the list includes four formations, but the rest of the section only discusses two of them?
"The unique structure was once some of the first material used in housing in early 20th century South Florida." Having was once and some of the first in the same sentence is awkward and unclear.
"The presence of the structure of this sedimentary formation affects the natural history:" Yick. How about "The structure of this sedimentary formation affects the wildlife above it:" ?
"a slight rise of compressed sand that divides the runoff between the Caloosahatchee River and Big Cypress" Does this refer to Big Cypress Swamp, or Big Cypress National Preserve?
"The basin formation is so neatly rounded and so unlike the rest of the topography of Florida that one scientist hypothesized that it was created by an asteroid strike in South Florida approximately 36 million years ago."
- This would be the first time I've ever heard a geological formation described as "neat".
- Which scientist?
- Is this theory prevalent within the scientific community? If not, why not?
"Both the Miami Limestone formation and the Fort Thompson limestone contain" As it's worded, you're implying that each of these formations has its own Biscayne Bay.
"Other aquifers suspended between layers of limestone and clastics are called intermediate aquifers." Is this information unique to the Everglades region? If not, why is it relevant?
"With the rise of sea levels that occurred approximately 17,000 years ago" Is there an article about this era? A wikilink would be very helpful here.
"Slower runoff also created almost 18 feet (5.5 m) thick buildup of peat in the area." This isn't a very natural way of writing, and the {{convert}} template doesn't give many options, unless you want to write out the numbers manually.
"The presence of such peat deposits, indicated about 5,000 years ago" Not sure about indicated. Maybe dated to or prevalent?

I agree the flow of words is broken in the first paragraph under Geology, but the inclusion of prehistoric geology formation was a request specifically made during the Everglades National Park FAC. Any suggestions about how to make it better?

Well, that chunk doesn't mention the Everglades or even South Florida. I think just adding a phrase or two relating it back to the main topic will keep the reader connected.

I know the intermediate aquifers need to be expanded, but I need to find more information on them.

If the terminology used by geologists and hydrologists for aquifers is "recharged", should that not also be used in the article? --Moni3 (talk) 13:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I had no idea that "recharged" is actual geology jargon. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 14:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Calcium deposits are left behind when flooding is shorter, evidence that water rises and falls depending on rainfall, where more limestone is exposed" I have no idea how these three statements are connected.
"Lake Okeechobee, which is a vast but very shallow lake." It may not be obvious to some people that the shallowness of Okeechobee contributes to the flooding.
"The gradient change from Lake Okeechobee to Florida Bay is approximately 2 inches (5.1 cm) per mile, that makes an almost 60 miles (97 km) wide expanse of river that travels about .5 miles (0.80 km) a day." Unclear how the gradient in this area affects the width of the river.
"Variations of the rate of flow of water from Lake Okeechobee to Florida Bay span from months to years." The length of time between each variation doesn't give any clue as to how much the rate varies or why the rate varies.
"Animals adapt to the seasonal rise and fall of water as the Everglades is in constant change due to the amount of water present." This sentence seems like two separate ideas. Both animal adaptations and changing Everglades are being attributed to fluctuating water levels. Also, what sorts of animals adapt? Is it just fish and river otters, or land mammals too?
"Freezing in winter months can occur, but is rare and erratic in severity." Freezing of what? Babies? Popsicles? Ice rinks?
"when precipitation is related to tropical cyclones and thunderstorms" I'd think that precipitation is always related to cyclones and storms. Perhaps you meant augmented by or brought about by ?
"The 7-month dry season through the winter months features only 25 percent of the total precipitation between November and March" This statement is confusing because it's unclear which phrases go together. When I first read it, I thought "25 percent of the total precipitation between November and March" was all one phrase. It took me a few rereads to realize that "25 percent of the total precipitation" is one phrase, and "between November and March" describes when the dry season takes place. Also, I'm not sure that features is the right verb. But I won't change it, because then I'll be wrong. :)
"During a normal year..." What does normal mean? A year with a bell curve? Perpendicular to the surface? A non-leap year?
"During a year affected by drought, the rate may reach more than 50 inches (130 cm)" Why is it that more water evapotranspirates when there's less rain?
"it is spurned primarily by solar energy" Is there some scientific use of the word spurn that I'm unaware of?
"Evapotranspiration is responsible for approximately 70 –90 percent of water entering undeveloped wetland regions in the Everglades" Entering? I thought evapotranspiration was responsible for water leaving the Everglades.

I think the point I was trying to make when I wrote this a couple months ago...hmm...is that the Everglades creates and sustains its own tiny climate patterns over south Florida. Water is stored, evaporates, moves to say, north of Lake Okeechobee, rains, and flows back into the system. Occasionally storms - hurricanes or cyclones, come from the ocean, but the daily torrential rains come from within the region. Course, I can't remember what I was trying to do yesterday, so I'm not sure how accurate my memory is for something I tried to do 2 months ago. Let me know if I need to be clearer. --Moni3 (talk) 15:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would be clearer if the sentence started off with "Evapotranspiration and subsequent precipitation..." or something to that effect.

"From August to October, however, tropical depressions, storms, and hurricanes may double the amount of precipitation compared to other months through the year." Somewhat unnatural ordering of phrases. Consider rearranging to "However, precipitation levels are often twice as high from August to October due to tropical depressions, storms, and hurricanes."
"Storm systems are significantly affected by El Niño" Why is El Nino italicized?
"between 1951 and 1980, precipitation in South Florida varied between 34 inches (86 cm) to 88 inches (220 cm)." These statistics are inconsistent and incompatible with those provided in the table.
"Between 1871 and 1981, 138 tropical cyclones struck near or over the Everglades." The phrase "near or over" implies none of the storms actually the Everglades itself.
"The Everglades is a complex system of interdependent ecosystems. The "River of Grass" metaphor given by Marjory Stoneman Douglas in 1947 represents only a portion of the system. The area recognized as the Everglades was originally a complex of marshes and prairies 4,000 square miles (10,000 km²) in size throughout five Florida counties."
- This is the only occurrence of "River of Grass" being described as a metaphor.
- The first and third sentences are redundant. Consider expanding the second sentence to become a more suitable opening to the section, and merging the first and third sentences.
- "complex" used as a noun often implies a system of buildings, such as in "office complex"
- What time period does "originally" refer to? Are the delineations of our modern county system relevant for that time period?
"The underlying bedrock or limestone of the Everglades basin affects how long an area within the region stays flooded throughout the year, or a hydroperiod."
- Is it bedrock or is it limestone?
- This implies that a hydroperiod is a year long, but a few sentences later we learn a hydroperiod can be shorter than 10 months.
"Areas that were submerged beneath seawater for longer periods of time hold more water within the porous oolites and limestone than older types of rock that spent more time above sea level." When was this? The use of the narrative past tense implies that these underwater periods occurred a long time ago.
"but the nutrients in the peat quickly deteriorated" Because of the agriculture attempts, or because of some other factor?
"Some homes built in the areas of early farms had to have their foundations moved to stilts" A foundation is a concrete slab, is it not? It is my (mis)understanding that the foundation would be replaced by stilts.
"Water is the most dominant element" What sort of element do you mean? Most encyclopedic occurrences of the word element refer to the periodic table.
"At the end of the Wisconsin ice age" when was this?

El Nino is a Spanish word. Should it not be italicized?

I checked a few other articles that link to it, and they don't italicize.

Both bedrock and limestone. The Big Cypress has exposed bedrock.

A hydroperiod is the amount of time throughout a year that an area remains flooded. Sawgrass prairies and sloughs have a hydroperiod of 10 months or more. Pineland has virtually no hydroperiod. Though that is described, is that not clear?

You explain it well, it's just the first "or a hydroperiod" that's ambiguous. Consider replacing it with something more specific.

I meant element in the Earth, Wind, and Fire sense.

I would be cautious against misusing chemistry terminology here. Keep in mind that the next paragraph uses "solution" and "acidic".

Per suggestions of an editor who provided a peer review for Geography and ecology of the Everglades, I switched Rock and Water.

It seems odd that the Rock and Fire sections are written about the present while the Water section is (or appears to be) written about a period 10,000 years ago. Is that why you switched Water to make it first?
"more opportunities for solution: the tendency of the slightly acidic rainwater to dissolve limestone." This reads as though you're giving a definition for "solution," but the phrase "the tendency of" doesn't fit.
"creates slight valleys and plateaus (a matter of inches, usually)" Unencyclopedic tone, and it's somewhat vague. What is a matter of inches? The distance between valleys? The width of each valley? The depth?
"The majority of fires are caused by lightning strikes" Are there any other major causes of fires that are worth mentioning?
"Their effects are largely superficial, and serve to foster further plant growth: sawgrass will burn above water, but the roots are preserved underneath. Fire in the sawgrass marshes serves to keep out larger bushes and trees, and releases nutrients from decaying plant matter more efficiently than decomposition" The example of sawgrass marshes doesn't really confirm the earlier statement. If the fires serve to foster further plant growth, why do they keep out bushes and trees? Consider replacing "further" with "specific" or something to that effect.
"but there is less peat in the deepest portion of this organic material" Unclear. How can there be less of something within itself? Do you mean that peat is less dense in the deepest portions?
"Scientists point to fire as the reason, as well as being the cause of the black muck appearance of the soils"
- "Scientists point to fire as the reason" is not very encyclopedic.
- "the black muck appearance" is unnatural and unclear.
"...the region formed into what it appears as today" Unnatural word choice. Perhaps something like "...the region progressed towards its current appearance" or "...the region formed into how it appears today" would work better.
"This area features the shallow river" Which area, the marshes? Or the sloughs? Or both? If it's both, why is it "this area" instead of "these areas"?
"Some authors refer to it as the "true Everglades" or just "the Glades""
- What is "it"? The area, or the river?
- Why do they refer to it as such?
"The primary feature of the Everglades is the sawgrass marsh." Aha! This might have been a better way to start the section.
"Sawgrass thrives in the slowly creeping water, but may die under too much" consider replacing "too much" with "unusually deep water", or something to that effect.
"The hydroperiod for the marsh is at least nine months, and can last longer. In shorter hydroperiods, marl may form instead of the peat"
- Shorter than nine months? Or shorter than the longer ones?
- This sentence is oddly placed. It appears right between two sentences about sawgrass. Consider regrouping/restructuring this paragraph to make it jump around less.
Some of the information in Sawgrass marshes and sloughs is duplicated from Rock.

Ok. I think I made the changes you suggested. Let me know if further clarification is needed. --Moni3 (talk) 17:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Where sawgrass makes way for channels or free-flowing water, sloughs develop." Is this supposed to say "channels of free-flowing water" ?
"Sloughs are about 3 feet (0.91 m) deeper than sawgrass marshes" This section never states how deep sawgrass marshes are. You should provide either a number to compare to or an exact depth.
"but plant diversity is the primary characteristic." I was unaware that something could have a "primary characteristic."
"and the water is usually shallow at only 4 inches (10 cm)"
- Statement should end with "deep"
- Does "usually" mean "on average"?
"Solution holes may remain flooded" And what are solution holes?
"Alligators have created a niche in wet prairies due to their activity." Activity of the alligators, or of the prairies?
"Alligator hosts then feed upon some of what comes to the hole." What are alligator hosts? Are you referring to the animals that alligators are hosting?

--

"The islets are slightly elevated due to areas unharmed by deep peat fires"
- First and only occurrence of "islets"
- Are they elevated "due to areas unharmed by fires" or "because they are areas unharmed by fires"?
"such as Southern live oaks, gumbo limbo, royal palm, and bustic" Mixing of singular and plural trees in this list.
"making the hammocks very difficult to penetrate." Difficult for animals, or difficult for people? Or for penises?
"Water in sloughs flow around the islands creating moats." Perhaps an image is needed to help illustrate this concept. I thought the islands just sat in a big swamp, not in a moat.
"The height of the trees are limited to weather factors such as frost, lightning, and wind" Should be "limited by weather factors" ?
"The most significant feature of the pine rockland ecosystem" Why is it that the section is called "Pineland" but it generally refers to itself as "Pine rockland" ?
"Pine rockland communities require fire to maintain them" Does "them" refer to the slash pines, or to the communities?

Dude, if you want to put your wang into a clump of saw palmettos, that is all you. I take no responsibility for that idea.

The entire communities of pineland require fire. Is that not clear? --Moni3 (talk) 12:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently not. I was fairly certain that the sentence referred to slash pines because the previous sentence said they were "the most significant feature". I only listed it here in case I was wrong, which I was. If fire maintainence is not why slash pines are significant, why are they?

"A period without significant fire can turn pineland into hardwood hammock" Should be either "a hardwood hammock" or "hardwood hammocks" for grammar.
"that allow them to sprout quickly following being charred" Two "-ing"s in a row is awkward. Consider replacing "following" with "upon" or "after", or replace "following being" with "once".
"Prior to development of the South Florida region" What sort of development? Agricultural? Industrial? Cultural?
"More than 12 miles (19 km) of north-south strands of pine rockland communities" I have no idea what this means in terms of the original 161,660 acres.
"commonly called "The Big Cypress."" There are a few instances in the article in which Big Cypress Swamp is referred to as The Big Cypress. I would avoid using the "common" name before the connection is explained.
"It takes up the majority of Collier County" Although the meaning is clear, "takes up" is a tad unencyclopedic and has a somewhat negative connotation.
"at its most limited measurement," Not sure what kind of limits are being put on the measurements. Perhaps you mean "at its most conservative estimates" ?
"but that more than doubles in considering its hydrologic boundary." No idea what this means.
The Cypress section seems to be focused on Big Cypress Swamp, or at least on cypress swamps in general. Consider changing the name of the section to more accurately reflect its contents.
"...of water in the rainy season" This is the only instance of the "wet season" being referred to as the "rainy season." Assimilate!
"Cypresses are conifers that are uniquely adapted to thrive in flooded conditions, with buttressed trunks and root projections that protrude out of the water, called "knees"" Another oddly-placed sentence. It is odd to end a paragraph about a swamp with a sentence about the trees. I would move this sentence to somewhere in the second paragraph, which describes the cypresses in greater detail.

--

"Where fresh water meets salt water is a transitional zone where mangrove trees live, and are specially adapted to both kinds of water."
- This sentence should mention brackish water to make the next paragraph clearer.
- I've never heard "live" used when discussing trees, consider replacing with "grow".
- The second clause might flow better if you replace "and" with "as they".
"In the wet season the fresh water .... In dryer years," I found this confusing, as I expected the sentence to contrast the wet season with the dry season. Does "in dryer years" refer to the dry season, or to years in which the wet season is not as prominent?
"The Everglades have the most extensive continguous system of mangroves in the world" Did you mean "continuous" or "contiguous"?
"The estuarine ecosystem of the Ten Thousand Islands covers almost 200,000 acres." This an interesting way to end a paragraph that's not about the Ten Thousand Islands.
"red, black, and white, although all are from different families" If they are members of the same order, it might be good to mention that, as it would make it clearer that you're discussing taxonomical classification.
"All are tolerant of salt, brackish, and fresh water, grow in oxygen-poor soil," It's unclear if the mangroves are capable of growing in oxygen-poor soil, or if they require such soil.
"All species are integral to coastline protection during severe storms." Consider starting off the sentence with "all species of mangrove" or "all three species" or "the three species are all" for better flow.
"Red mangroves have roots that reach far, trapping sediments in between." This lead me to think you were going to set up a comparison between the benefits of each type of mangrove. If reds are the only ones with special characteristics worth mentioning, consider moving it to the end of the paragraph and starting it off with "Red mangroves also...".
"Because much of the coast and the inner estuaries are built by mangroves" I was unaware that mangroves can build.
"the ecosystems in Florida Bay are considered to be a part of the Everglades." Part of the Everglades? Or connected to the ecosystems within the Everglades? Or affected by the Everglades?
"More than 800 square miles (2,100 km²) of Florida Bay is protected by Everglades National Park" Protected by ENP? Or protected as part of ENP?

Florida Bay is under the federal protection of Everglades National Park. Restrictions on fishing and watercraft are more stringent in Florida Bay than the Gulf of Mexico, and resource exploitation is not allowed (until W gave the let's drill our coastlines speech today... mmffff!!! . I think "by" is accurate, but are you saying this needs to be clarified further? --Moni3 (talk) 16:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's clear what it means. I just didn't know if "protected by" was the right way of putting it.

"the large animals became extinct in Florida" Consider replacing "large" with "larger" or giving examples of large animals.
"and they created many tools with the resources they had." The end of the sentence is blah. How about "with the various resources available to them." ? Or you could give examples of the resources they had.
"Florida Indians developed into three distinct but similar cultures that were centered around bodies of water: Okeechoobee, Caloosahatchie, and Glades."
- Okeechobee sp?
- Remember that problem we had in Indigenous people about how to differentiate between the tribe and the body of water? It's even more important now to clarify what you mean because the reader doesn't have a map to refer to.
"From the Glades peoples, two major tribes emerged in the area:" Which area?
"The Calusa was the largest and most powerful tribe in South Florida." Ever? Or at a specific time?
"In 1545 a 13-year-old boy was the only survivor of a shipwreck off the coast of Florida. For seventeen years Hernando de Escalante Fontaneda lived with the Calusa until Spanish explorers took him back to Spain where he wrote about his observations. Pedro Menéndez de Avilés found Fontaneda in 1566 while approaching the Calusa with the intention of establishing relations with them to ease the settlement of the future Spanish colony."
- This chunk is somewhat repetitive and doesn't connect to the opening sentences of the paragraph.
- From 1545 to 1566 is 21 years, not 17... blackjack!
"However, in the more than 200 years the Calusa had relations with the Spanish, they were successfully able to resist the attempts to missionize them." The theys and thems are confusing. How about "Despite more than 200 years of relations with the Spanish, the Calusa were able to resist various attempts to be missionized." or some such?
"[The] smaller tribes of Ais and Jaega, [which] lived to the east of Lake Okeechobee, [] were subjugated [by] the Calusa." My suggestions on how to improve this year's winner of the Bad Summary Statements Contest are in brackets. Also, when were they subjugated?
"The Calusa, like their predecessors, were hunter-gatherers who existed on small game, fish, turtles, alligators, shellfish, and various plants." Seeing as this has no connection to the previous chunk about Calusa history, perhaps this is a good spot for a new paragraph?
"Finding little use for the soft limestone" Remind me (and by "me", I mean "the reader") what limestone we're talking about here.
"although sharpened reeds were also effective." Effective for what? Chicken satay? Hypodermic needles? Urethral catheters?
"Weapons consisted of bows and arrows, atlatls, and spears. Most villages were located at the mouths of rivers or on key islands." A few "their"s should be injected into these statements to make more flowy.
"Canoes were used for transportation, evidenced by shell mounds in and around the Everglades that border canoe trails, and South Florida tribes often canoed through the Everglades, but rarely lived in them."
- Consider breaking apart into two sentences.
- Does "South Florida tribes" refer to Calusa tribes which happened to live in South Florida? Or does it refer to another group?
"Canoe trips to Cuba were also common." Why?
"Estimated numbers of Calusa at the beginning of the occupation of the Spanish ranged from 4,000 to 7,000" Replace "occupation of the Spanish" with "Spanish occupation". As it's written now, it implies that the Calusa were occupying Spanish territory.
"and asked to be removed to Cuba where almost 200 died of illness." Asked who? The Yamassee, or the Spanish?

--

"The found the coastal prairies" Should be "they found" ?
"took the chief's nephew to Havana to be educated, and his brother to Spain" Whose brother, the chief's? or the nephew's?
"After Menéndez, mention of the Tequesta in documents is rare." Did Menendez die? Or did he simply leave?
"An British surveyor in 1770 described" Should be either "A British" or "An English"...
"The beginnings of the Seminoles are vague," No they're not. Our knowledge of the beginnings is vague. The beginnings themselves are somewhat unknown.
"the Moultrie Creek Treaty forced them to live on a 5-million acre reservation" That's not standard number notation. Do you mean "5 million-acre" ?
"They made a living by hunting" Deja vu.
"and adapted housing probably from the Calusa to build chickees:" Did the Seminoles use existing Calusa materials to construct chickees? Or did the Calusa invent chickees which the the Seminoles later adopted?
"causing the Second Seminole War from 1835 to 1842 and the Third Seminole War from 1855 to 1859." What about the First Seminole War?
"They soon ranged farther south where they numbered approximately 300 in the Everglades region ... By 1913, Seminoles in the Everglades numbered no more than 325" So the population grew during the Seminole Wars?
"Villages were not large, due to the limited size of hammocks" Stiff. Consider saying "Their villages were not large, due to the limited size of the hammocks."

Most changes made. "Adapted" is more accurate than adopted. Historians disagree about how chickees came into being, since only one instance of structures is mentioned in reports of the Calusa. But the historian in the cited reference made the Calusa connection.

I'm sorry - it may be my frightfully short memory, but I don't understand what deja vu means up there. Yes, I know the concept, but I searched for "hunting" in this article, thinking that phrase appeared more than once, but no. I also searched on this page for the suggestion to change the phrase, but no. --Moni3 (talk) 15:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You used that exact phrase in Indigenous people of the Everglades region, to which I noted, "I don't think the idiom made a living really applies to this article."

"opinion about the value of Florida to the Union was dubious" Odd wording.
"some felt it a useless land of swamps and horrible animals" "horrible animals" is not very encyclopedic. Is that supposed to be a direct quote?
"while others considered it being offered by God for national prosperity" What would lead them to believe this?
"offered the opportunity to map a poorly understood part of the country." Poorly understood, or largely unknown? Or both?
"expedition in 1840 into the Everglades with 90 soldiers in 16 canoes." Too many prepositions. How about "1840 expedition into the Everglades with 90 soldiers" ?
"The anonymous writer described the terrain they were crossing:" Not sure what "they" refers to here. Consider rewording to avoid using ambiguous pronouns.
"The land seemed to inspire extreme reactions of wonder or hatred." Consider replacing "of wonder or hatred" with "of both wonder and hatred".
"An army surgeon wrote, ..." No context whatsoever. Could be anywhere between 1840 and 1897.
"In 1897 an explorer named Hugh Willoughby spent eight days canoeing with a party from the mouth of the Harney River to the Miami River."
- Opening could be truncated to "In 1897, explorer Hugh Willoughby spent..."
- Since Harney River isn't linked, consider providing the distance between the two rivers, a town near the Harney River, or something like that.
"and 10,000 alligators "more or less" in Lake Okeechobee." Should be "and "more or less" 10,000 alligators in Lake Okeechobee" unless what you've written is a direct quote.
"Willoughby pointed out that much of the rest of the country had been mapped and explored" Should be "explored and mapped". One explores before one maps, right?

--

"A national push for expansion and progress toward the later part of the 19th century" Consider specifying a specific type of progress, and replacing "toward" with "in". As it's written now, people seemed to want to travel forward in time from the early 19th century to the late 19th century.
"According to historians," which historians?
"A resolution" Did the resolution have a name or ID number? Or am I expecting too much of the 1842 US Congress?
"consult [them] ... on the feasibility of draining them. Smith asked [them] and many favored the idea." The first sentences is about feasibility, while the second seems to be about approval. They are fairly different things.
"asking for $500,000 to do the job" Not very encyclopedic. Perhaps you meant "to fund the project" ?
"In 1850 Congress passed a law that gave several states wetlands within their state boundaries." Huh?
"Not until after The Civil War and Reconstruction were over in 1877 did attention turn back to the Everglades." It was never made clear that these events turned attention away from the Everglades.

--

"After the Civil War the Florida formed an agency called the Internal Improvement Fund (IIF)" What does "the Florida" refer to? Also, you can drop "an agency called the" to make the sentence sound better.
"to improve the infrastructure of Florida through roads, canals, and rail lines." It would be more direct to say "to improve/expand/whatever the state's roads, canals, and rail lines."
"The IIF found ... Hamilton Disston interested..." Not sure what you mean by "found".
"Disston was persuaded to purchase..." fist he was interested, but now he was persuaded. Perhaps the word "negotiate" should be in there somewhere?
"The New York Times declared it the largest purchase of land by any individual in the world." Yikes. No context whatsoever. Did the New York Times declare this in 1881? Or did they declare it later? Was it ever surpassed? Given that none of these questions can be answered by looking at the citation, I think it's better to just drop this irrelevant factoid.
"The canals seemed to work in lowering the water levels in the wetlands surrounding the rivers at first." This is an encyclopedia, not a children's story. Information should be simply given, with no foreshadowing involved.
"they were ineffective in anticipating" How can a canal anticipate anything? It has no brain. It is a canal. Perhaps you meant "the designers failed to anticipate" ?
"throughout the United States and Europe...establishing towns on the west coast and in central Florida." West coast of the United States? Or Europe? Or Florida?

--

"The IIF was able to invest in projects" What kind of projects?
"Henry Flagler became enchanted with St. Augustine during a vacation." First, "enchanted" is not very encyclopedic. Second, where is St. Augustine? It's not linked and there's no context!
"In 1888, he began purchasing land and building rail lines along the east coast of Florida, as far south as Palm Beach in 1893" The "in 1893" at the end is confusing and awkward. Perhaps something like "From 1888 to 1893, he began purchasing land and building rail lines along the east coast of Florida, as far south as Palm Beach." would be clearer? Also, consider adding something with "and as far north as..." so we can see the entire range.
"Along the way he built resort hotels, transforming territorial outposts into tourist destinations, and the land bordering the rail lines into citrus farms" ...? How exactly does the act of building a hotel transform land into citrus farms? And wtf is a "territorial outpost" ? Major rewording needed here.
"By 1896 the rail line had been extended to Biscayne Bay" Context has not been established to make this clear. Earlier in the paragraph, it says he built rail lines, so which one does this refer to? Also, where did the line extend from?
"Three months after the first train had arrived, the residents of Miami, numbering 512 in all, voted to incorporate the town." The first train arrived in Miami? Or at Biscayne Bay? When did the first year arrive?
"after the Royal Palm Hotel was opened" When?
As a more general note, I don't understand why Henry Flagler is listed as a subsection of Drainage. The Everglades are never even mentioned in his section, and nothing he accomplished involved any sort of drainage.

--

"the strongest candidate, Napoleon Bonaparte Broward" A fairly bold statement. Definitely needs a ref or rewording to avoid POV.
"based a significant portion of his campaign on draining the Everglades" Do you mean "a significant portion of his platform..." ?
"and compared its potential to Holland and Egypt." What kind of potential? Economic? Reputation? Pyramid-ness?
"Soon after his election" May confuse some readers. Perhaps "successful election" or "inauguration" or some such?
"he made good on his promise" So he's a mafioso now? Surely there is a more encyclopedic way to word this.
" and pushed the Florida legislature to form a group of commissioners to oversee reclamation of flooded lands" Lots of prepositions. How about "and pushed for the reclamation of flooded lands" ?
"In 1907 they" Who is they? The legislature? The group of commissioners? The potential Egyptians?
"were paid by Richard Bolles" Who the hell is he? He's not linked, this is the only mention of him in the entire article, and there's no description of him.
"He was elected to the Senate" Who is he? The mysterious Mr. Bolles? Or the predeccesor, Ken Jennings?
"Land in the Everglades was being sold for $15 an acre a month after Broward died" Ah, so now we know who died. This sentence disrupts the flow of the paragraph. The cost of land in the Everglades would be more relevant in the previous paragraph.
"railway stations at towns as soon as the populations warranted them" Not sure what "warranted" implies. Does it mean "approved of"? Or "were large enough for" ?
"...the populations warranted them, news of the Panama Canal inspired..." This sentence needs some conjunctions to make sense grammatically.
Each of these Drainage subsections focuses on a person or group, but the Empire subsection randomly switches back to Flagler. Make it a timeline xor group it by person.

--

"real estate advertising was promoted for newly reclaimed Everglades land all over the United States"
- Was the advertising promoted, or was the newly reclaimed land promoted?
- "all over" is not very encyclopedic.
"Land developers sold 20,000 lots in a few months." Finalist in the Annual Be Vague and Succinct! Contest ?
"Advertisements promised within eight weeks of arrival, a farmer could be making a living," Very awkward. It implies that the promises were being made within eight weeks of the advertisement's arrival.
"it took at least two months to clear the land." Clear the land of what?
"Some burned off the sawgrass or other vegetation to find the peat a source of fuel that continued to burn." Implies that peat burns perpetually and is a renewable source of energy.
"Animals and tractors used for plowing got mired in the muck and were useless." First, the equipment became useless. It didn't start off that way. Second, do animals really become useless upon getting stuck in mud? Reword for Sparta!
"When the muck dried, it turned to a fine black powder and created dust storms" This is the first mention of dust storms. Did the plowing somehow cause the drying / dust storms?
"they just as quickly wilted and died seemingly without reason" The use of "seemingly" implies that we now know why they died.
"The increasing population in towns near the Everglades provided hunting opportunities" Increasing population of humans, or of prey?
"Raccoons and otters were the most widely hunted for their skins." Unclear where the emphasis is. Were coons and otters the most widely hunted of any animal because of their skins? Or were they hunted primarily because of their skins, but not more so than any other animal?
"Wading birds were a particular target." As opposed to a vague target?
"In 1886, 5 million birds were estimated to be killed for their feathers" Were 5 million birds killed in 1886 alone? Or were 5 million birds killed by 1886"?
"Millinery was a $17 million a year industry that motivated plume harvesters to lay in watch of nests of egrets and many colored birds during the nesting season, shoot the parents with small-bore rifles, and leave the chicks to starve" Not sure how the size of the industry motivated the hunting methods. This sentence reads more like a PETA member on a soapbox than an informative statement.
"Hunters could collect plumes from a hundred birds on a good day." Unencyclopedic. Would work better if merged into another sentence.
"Miami experienced a second real estate boom that earned a developer in Coral Gables $150 million"
- What is Coral Gables?
- If this mythical money-making man is notable enough to warrant inclusion, where's his name?
Waterfront property was the most highly valued."
- Why?
- Stats?
"Mangrove trees were cut down and replaced with palm trees because the view was better." Do this mean "because they were more attractive"? Or "because they were less obtrusive on the landscape"?
"Acres of South Florida slash pine were taken down" Is "taken down" an industry term? It sounds like slash pine is a Christmas decoration.
Why is this section called Population surge and not Economic surge? The whole section deals with different industries being boosted during this time period.

--

"Two catastrophic hurricanes in 1926 and 1928 caused Lake Okeechobee to breach its levees, killing thousands of people."
- Which hurricanes?
- People living along the shore of the lake, or in nearby towns?
The government began to focus on the control of floods rather than drainage.
- Which government, state or federal?
- Does "control of floods" mean short-term flood relief? Or long-term flood prevention?
"President Herbert Hoover toured the towns affected by the 1928 Okeechobee Hurricane" Needs a tad more context for the paragraph to become clear. Did Hoover tour the towns in 1928, or in 1929? If 1928, why is the paragraph out of chronological order? If 1929, was the 1928 hurricane late in the year?
"ordered the Army Corps of Engineers to assist the communities" Perhaps there is a more specific term that can be used here besides "assist." Does the assistance refer to the dike in the next sentence?
"Control of the Hoover Dike" Is the Hoover Dike the same dike that was described in the previous sentence? If so, either make that clearer here, or name the dike in the previous sentence.
"the United States declared legal limits of the lake to between 14 and 17 feet" Wtf? Winner of the Make the Least Amount of Sense Possible contest?
"More than $20 million was spent on the entire project." Does "entire project" refer to the Caloosahatchie canal? Or to all of the flood control efforts described in the entire paragraph?
"Sugarcane production soared after the dike and canal were built. The populations of the small towns surrounding the lake jumped from 3,000 to 9,000 after World War II" Relevant to flood control...?
"Immediately the effects of the Hoover Dike were seen." Perhaps you meant to say "The effects of the Hoover Dike were almost immediate."
"An extended drought occurred in the 1930s" Seeing as the previous paragraph spanned from 1926 to 1937, I'm not sure what "the 1930s" could refer to. Perhaps "the late 1930s" would work better.
"the Everglades became parched" Is parched a real scientific term? It makes me think that the Everglades got really thirsy and, being British, decided to drink tea.
"when the city brought in an expert to explain why" Was he there to explain why, or to find out why?
"Scientists who took soil samples before draining did not take into account that the organic composition of peat and muck in the Everglades was mixed with a bacteria that added to the process of decomposition under water because it was not mixed with oxygen."
- Suggested addition is bolded.
- Any way to cut this snake up?
"As soon as the water was gone" Which water? The salt ocean water? Or the groundwater?

--

"The idea of a national park for the Everglades was pitched"
- Not sure that "national park for the Everglades" is the correct way to phrase it. How about "...in the Everglades" or "the Everglades becoming a National Park" or something?
- "pitched" -> "proposed" ?
"a Miami land developer named Ernest F. Coe" This is one of those quirks of your writing style that has always bugged me. Instead of the format "blah blah blah by a something named someone", it's more concise and encyclopedic to simply say "blah blah blah by something someone".
"there was not enough money during the Great Depression to purchase..." I don't know much about economics, but I'm pretty sure that's not true. Consider dropping "not enough money" and incorporating "Congress was hesistant" or something like that.
"a former editor from The Miami Herald and freelance writer named Marjory Stoneman Douglas" Same as the Ernest F. Coe issue above.
"After researching the region for five years, she described the history and ecology of the South Florida in great detail." How about "After five years of research, Douglas's book described ..." ?
"the Everglades were dying, although it could be reversed" Awkward wording and clumsy ending to the paragraph. How about "the Everglades were dying, although the deterioration could be reversed so long as immediate action was taken."
Is the Everglades National Park supposed to be about Flood Control? Wrong subsectioning?

--

"two hurricanes and the wet season caused 100 inches (250 cm) to fall on South Florida." Unnatural wording. How about "two hurricanes and the wet season caused 100 inches of rainfall in South Florida." Also, is 100 an approximation or a statistic?
"The C&SF divided the Everglades into basins." Did C&SF physically divide the Everglades? Or did they draw lines on a map? If the former, you should explain how they did it. If the latter, consider replacing "divided" with "divvied" or "apportioned".
"In the southern Everglades was Everglades National Park." I would definitely make this sentence follow right after "The C&SF divided the Everglades into basins." This allows all of the statements about the WCAs to be grouped together.
"Levees and pumping stations bordered each WCA, and released water in dryer times or removed it and pumped it to the oceans in times of flood." Barf! How about "Levees and pumping stations bordered each WCA, releasing water during droughts and pumping water to the oceans during floods.
You adequately describe the pumping stations, but the article doesn't clearly state what a WCA really is. Is it an area that people aren't allowed to pollute/take water from?
"The C&SF constructed over 1,000 miles (1,600 km) of canals, and hundreds of pumping stations and levees within three decades." Which three decades? Does "three decades" mean 30 years, or spanning three different decades?
How do the factoids about metropolitan growth connect to the C&SF? They seem to be arbitrarily plopped in this section.

--

"The C&SF established 470,000 acres (1,900 km²) for the Everglades Agricultural Area" When?
"27 percent of the Everglades prior to development" I just don't really know how to interpret this. My best guess is that prior to all forms of development, 470,000 acres would have been 27% of the total Everglades area.
"adding large amounts of manganese sulfate to Everglades muck produced a profitable harvest for vegetables." You seem to have skipped several links on the chain of cause and effect. The manganese sulfate did something to the muck which made the vegetables grow more/faster/healthier for some reason, which in turn led to a more profitable harvest, yes?
This section never defines Everglades Agricultural Area.
"The primary cash crop in the EAA is sugarcane" Somehow we've jumped from the 1920s to the immediate present. Does this mean "The primary cash crop is and always has been sugarcane"? Or does it mean "The primary cash crop is currently, after 80 years, sugarcane"?
After the mention of the 1920s, this section gives no context whatsoever. When is this all happening?

--

"A turning point came for development in the Everglades at the proposition" Very awkward wording, especially when starting off the paragraph.
"the proposition of an expanded airport after Miami International Airport outgrew its capacities"
- "expanded airport" implies that they planned to renovate the existing airport, which isn't true, right?
- How exactly does an airport grow?
"and the chosen location was 6 miles (9.7 km) north of Everglades National Park" Why?
"The first sentence of the U.S. Department of Interior study of the environmental impact of the jetport read," Poor flow. How about "However, a U.S. Department of Interior study concluded," ?
"the proposed jetport would create 4,000,000 US gallons" should probably include the word "estimate" in there somewhere.
"the project met staunch opposition" From whom?
"Governor Claude Kirk" Governor of which state? This is the first and only mention of this person.
"Marjory Stoneman Douglas was persuaded" by whom? Renegade dwarves?
"Nixon instead established..." instead of what? Wtf is going on?

--

"a meandering 90-mile (140 km)-long river" Meandering isn't a very encyclopedic-sounding adjective. How does a geographer describe a bendy river?
"river that was drained" This is confusing. How can you straighten a river that was drained? "Drained" implies that it's not there anymore!
"The C&SF started building the C-38 canal in 1962 and the effects were seen almost immediately. Waterfowl, wading birds, and fish disappeared" Using "the effects" implies that harming wildlife was the intended effect of the canal. Perhaps replace it with "harmful effects" or provide a brief description of the canal.
"demand the region be restored before the canal was finished in 1971." Did the fishers make a demand in 1971? Or was the canal's projected completion in 1971? In either case, what happened next? Were the demands listened to?
"The Kissimmee River Restoration project was approved by Congress in 1992" It was approved, eh? That's interesting. What is it?
"The entire project will be complete by 2011" Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This statement should include "projection" or "estimation".

--

"Further problems with the environment" You mean "further environmental problems"?
"The same year cattails were discovered overtaking sawgrass marshes in Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge." This sentence juts out awkwardly. Consider either combining it with the previous sentence or finding a better way to start it off. How about "That same year, ..." ?
"Scientists discovered" Which scientists?
"was flushed into canals and pumped back into the lake" The use of "was flushed" implies that it only happened once. Perhaps you mean "was being flushed"?
"The arrival of phosphorus allowed cattails to spread quickly" Why? Because of the marl thing? This should be made clearer.
"The cattails grew in dense mats—too thick for birds or alligators to nest in" The em dash is the editor's way of saying "I don't know how to properly connect clauses. Someone please help me." Also, shouldn't this be placed earlier in the paragraph when you're describing the visible problems?
The first paragraph of Water Quality starts off with a sentence about the algal bloom, implying that the rest of the paragraph will deal primarily with that subject, which is simply not true here. Either reorder the opening of the paragraph, or make the scientific explanation more substantial than "The arrival of phosphorus [...] promoted algae."
"and it fell as rain or dust during droughts" The mercury fell as rain? LOL JK USSR. Perhaps "and it accumulated both in rainfall and in dust particles" or something similar would work better.
"though they continue to be a concern" Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Either state who is concerned, or rewrite the sentence to be more encyclopedic.
"an attempt to legislate the lowering of phosphorus in Everglades waterways" Error 404. Either replace "lowering" with "removal" or insert "levels" after "phosphorus".
"ponds lined with lime rock and layers of peat and calcareous periphyton" Is there something missing here, or is this really a three-item list with two "and"s?

Comments by Ealdgyth edit

You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
- Current ref 12 (http://web.archive.org/web/20050503130449/everglades.fiu.edu/fiu/enhj/enh1105.html) is lacking a publisher
- With the {{cite news}}, I think if you use the work field, you get the magazine/newspaper in italics. Try it and see.
- Personal preference is for the bibliography after the notes, but that's just me.

Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 23:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments edit

As promised (and a bit late) here are my comments. Looks quite good and congrats on the FA status of the other articles in the series. Since this has already had quite extensive review comments, this will be brief.

WP:LEAD says "As a general guideline, the lead should be no longer than four paragraphs." Given the length and complexity of the article, and WP:IAR, I think a case can be made for five paragraphs at FAC, but this may be an issue.
Per WP:HEAD the title should not be repeated in the headers unless this is a quote of something else. So "Future of the Everglades" should just be "Future" or perhaps "Future plans", and "Native Americans in the Everglades" could just be "Native Americans"
The article has a lot of sections. Could some of the shorter sections be combined? For example could there be a "Calusa and Tequesta" section? Or how about "Hamilton Disston and Henry Flagler"? I would take a look at any section that is only one paragraph and see if it could be combined with another
For FA, and per WP:MOS#IMages, images should be set to thumb to allow reader preferences to take over. Vertical images can use "upright" to make them smaller and maps can be set larger, but Image:Hurricane Charley 13 aug 2004 1635Z.jpg needs to be thumb and others may too.

Hope this helps, these are nit picks but may come up at FAC. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Willow's Suggestions edit

As usual, I'm going to have to do this review piecemeal, as I read through the article and brood over it, but I know you'll be patient. :) Willow (talk) 18:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead satellite image is great, but could you label the geographical features you talk about in the lead, e.g., Lake Okeechobee?

I tried to improve the flow of the second paragraph of the lead, but if I changed the meaning, please revert my changes.

At first glance, the following clause would seem to be a red flag for our bullish fellow editors who love to smite POV: ;)

the same divisive politics that had affected the region for the previous 50 years have compromised the plan.

Would it be possible to be more specific about what you mean by "compromised" and "same divisive politics that had affected, etc."?

Add refs to the discussion of the Tamiami and Caloosahatchie formations under Limestone and aquifers? Or do the two refs at the end of the paragraph cover everything in the paragraph?

In the last paragraph of that section, perhaps add a phrase explaining where the peat came from — surely not from the slower-moving water itself? ;)

Similarly, under Hydrology, perhaps explain briefly how calcium is laid down?

What is the role of tides in the Everglades? I'm trying to understand the Everglades in analogy with the wetlands at the brackish mouth of the Connecticut River, which I know a lot better. :)