User:Aidan1704/Broughton Archipelago Provincial Park/SZ905 Peer Review

General info
Aidan1704
 * Whose work are you reviewing?
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Aidan1704/Broughton Archipelago Provincial Park
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):User:Aidan1704/Broughton Archipelago Provincial Park

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Great job with the draft!

The highlight of the article were the Ecology and the Human Impacts section. There is detailed information about the species that live in the protected area, including which are at risk. The population trend help in understanding the changes this area has seen. While in the "Human Impacts" section the article discusses how climate change has affected the species. Including the human impacts on aquaculture and noise pollution. Overall the page has great information.

The article does a great job in providing a concise summary of the protected area, why it was creating. The significance of this space for wildlife and the historical value of this area.

The draft currently meets the goal of addressing 5 topics - talked about species found in the protected area - which species are at risk - reasons that led to the creation of this protected area - the historical use of the now protected land - information about first nations whose territories are included in the protected area.

In REM 202W I have learned that every sentence that is not general knowledge should have a reference. Which can be excessive but I would suggest to put more references within the sentences especially for the "History" section.

The article discusses how climate change has impacted the marine life. However there are species in the protected area that do not live in the water. I would suggest to add how climate change impacts all the species in this area.

There are many references throughout the article, so the information within the article seems accurate and credible!

Within the Ecology section if you like, you can create subsections. A section talking about the marine life there and then a section talking about the animals that live on land. And more information about how the First Nations peoples where included in the process of creating this protected area. With the Indigenous presence section, you could make subsections. Explaining the historical significance of this space for First Nations, how they were involved in the process of creating this protected area.

The tone of the article is neutral, helpful and professional. The article does not take sides and shows the information as it is. The statements in the article are referenced, the sources are sufficient and appropriate.

Compared to the original article, this draft definitely has way more information. As mentioned before this article does a great job of giving a great summary of this place and its history. A little more detailed information in some sections, would be amazing.

The article does have different perspectives, however I think its necessary to include how the First Nations were involved in the process of creating the protected area.