Talk:History of marine biology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Limnology and Oceanography C‑class Mid‑importance

	Oceans portal This article is part of the WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the inland waters and marine environments. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on limnology- or oceanography-related topics, as well as to ensure that limnology and oceanography articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.Limnology and OceanographyWikipedia:WikiProject Limnology and OceanographyTemplate:WikiProject Limnology and OceanographyLimnology and Oceanography articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Work: Peer Review

This article is well written and shows great effort was put forth when composing it. It contains relevant content about the History of Marine Biology. This article is very organized by section, and it does not contain any spelling or grammatical errors. The introduction does a good job of summarizing the article chronologically. It talks about the many explorers and historians that have influenced marine biology, starting with the founder and ending with modern day exploration. I would maybe add a little more to the introduction about the actual content of study, not just the people studying it.

The main headings provide good structure to the article. I would add subheadings to make it easier for the reader locate specific aspects of the history of marine biology. For example, in the section "Early Exploration of the Deep Sea" I would add subheadings for the Phoenicians and the Greeks, Aristotle, and the Polynesians. I would definitely add a few images to show the diversity of marine life, and also even marine labs or other key places of research. I would maybe even add images of the ships that historians have used on their voyages while studying marine biology.

All of the aspects of this article are well balanced. I do not think any section dominates the rest. This article does a good job of remaining neutral for the most part, but I would try to research any negative impacts that resulted from studying the history of marine biology, if there are any.

The language emphasizes key information and all sources cited seem reliable. All paragraphs contain multiple citations located throughout the writing. However, make sure to always include page numbers to let the reader know where your information was found within the source.

I like how the ending paragraph states current events happening within marine biology today. I would try to implement a little more content about marine biology itself to back up the historical figures that have studied it throughout history. Overall this article is easy to understand and it has great structure and effort!

Great job!

Jcf028 (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2014 (UTC)jcf028[reply]

Suggestions

Reviewing articles as an assignment for class.

The lead section of the article is very well done. It gives a brief history of marine biology and an outline of what is explained in the article. The structure is also done well; it is in chronological order which helps the flow of the article for the reader. One suggestion would be to add some subheadings to help break up the big chunks of text and to make the article more easy for readers to find specific things. It could also make the article a little more interesting if there was pictures or diagrams. Perhaps a picture of a submersible or remote operated underwater vehicle. All three headings appear to have a balance in them. No topic it is covered more than the other. Writing of the topics is unbiased. There doesn't seem to be any sides/arguments in this article. The lists of sources is very reputable. It looks as though several journal articles and books are referenced. They are usually very reliable.

I would say the article overall is great. I don't think much can be done to improve.

Rory.Bonner (talk) 03:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC) 134.82.161.185 (talk) 03:16, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute

There is currently a disproportionate emphasis on the importance of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in this article, reflecting a US-centric position rather than a balanced global position. --Epipelagic (talk) 04:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More Information

I think this article has good preliminary facts. However, I feel as if more facts can be researched and added. Marine biology is a huge topic, especially the history and creation of it which needs to be expanded on. Specifically, the "Early Exploration of The Deep Sea," and, "Modern Studies," needs to have more depth. these are important factors in marine biology, yet there is not much information on it.

Nia4321 (talk) 16:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]