User talk:Daothao/sandbox

Peer Review

Peer Review 1

• The organization of your Article is sound and allows for a clear understanding from the reader. Perhaps you could add a section in regards to current research on the plate? This could further expand your article and it allows for another level of depth.
• You could also add a section for seismic activity as it is still a current subduction boundary, which would infer earthquakes.
• Much of your citations are located in the Morphology and Bathymetry section of your article, I suggest that you find sources for the other sections of the articles to ensure validity.
• Your list of sources is very good and varies in source type and genre, which allows for further audience exploration if they choose to follow up on your research.
• Both images used are useful to your article and aid in the information presented.

Ailobao (talk) 01:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review 2

• The headings you have chosen to focus on are good, clear, and relevant to the topic. You could maybe expand to include a section about how the plate impacts tectonic activity around it, such as the Cascadia Subduction Zone.
• The origins and history seemed very brief and could use more details about what the plate used to be (a part of the Farallon plate) and how it differs from the other plates nearby today.
• The morphology and bathymetry section was done well, perhaps you could expand on the effects the plate has on the north american continent or that could be included in another section like I mentioned in the first bullet.
• Wide variety of diverse sources.
• The first map you have does not clearly show the location of the plate to me, another map which makes the plate location more obvious would be helpful.

--Iborche (talk) 05:55, 22 May 2017 (UTC)