===Feedback from Sbonni===
Overall I think the article was well written, clearly organized, and had good direction. It was written in a way that was easy to understand and did not take any previous knowledge to understand the subject. The paragraphs were unbiased and lacked significant grammar and spelling errors. The main point where you could improve your writing would be to provide more details, especially when talking on a subject that is not common knowledge. My comments are not negative at all they are just suggestions. I think the article was very well written.
Nature of Somali Floods Gu Rains In your first sentence you attribute the flooding to the Gu Rains. I would suggest defining or providing more details specifically about the Gu rains. Your last sentence indicates that the floods cause damage to the communities around the area. Adding more detail regarding the extent of the damage you could illustrate just how dangerous the floods are to humans.
Agricultural stimulus This paragraph lacks a lot of supporting details. It may seem obvious but maybe add a sentence or two on how the droughts effect agriculture production in that area. Another sentence to add detail on if possible, would be what percent of the GDP is made up by Agriculture and livestock cultivation. Finally maybe try rewording and expanding the last sentence.
Human interaction and implications Human induced increases to destruction Your intro sentence is solid but don't stop with "floods", briefly outline how the government is at fault. Can you prove that the government really is at fault? If not it would be seen as bias. The rest of the paragraph is very good.
Attempts to decrease devastation Your intro sentence could be expanded. Maybe adding a short list of what efforts have been made. Expand on the "early warning system". How would it work?
Assistance drawbacks What function does this paragraph serve? You might be able to remove it. If you keep the paragraph the last sentence is a bit confusing, rewording might help.
Resiliency This paragraph is very well written. The statements are all backed up with evidence and descriptions.
Historical data The data in this paragraph is very detailed and can back up a lot of previous statements. Instead of having a paragraph for "Historical Data" you should insert the evidence into previous paragraphs to support your claims. This data will provide appropriate evidence for most of the incidences when I suggested more detail.
Start a discussion with MJoe17
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. Start a new discussion to connect and collaborate with MJoe17. What you say here will be public for others to see.
