User:Alaina.marcotte/Lake Cushman/JEMGC Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Alaina.marcotte


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alaina.marcotte/Lake_Cushman?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Lake Cushman

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:


 * Lead is detailed yet concise
 * I feel like I got a good introduction and general summary on what the rest of the article was going to be about, including the sections that you added
 * Should "north fork" be capitalized? It seems like it would be but I'm not entirely sure

Content:


 * Great job adding in so many new sections and sub-sections –– very informational
 * The added content nicely reflects the elements of the topic listed in the lead
 * The "Notable Incidents" section is a nice addition, especially because it mentions pretty current events

Tone and Balance:


 * Tone is pretty neutral and encyclopedic
 * Maybe take out the adjective "beautiful" in the lead to maximize neutrality
 * Each section and sub-section are very well rounded
 * All content from the lead is discussed later in different sections (plus the "Notable Incidents" section)

Sources and References:


 * All of the sources appear to be from reliable secondary sources
 * The sources are very current
 * There are opportunities to add links. Some include "Olympic National Park", "Hoodsport, Washington", etc.

Organization:


 * Very few minor grammatical errors (already fixed them in copy-edit)
 * Words and sentences flow, easy to read
 * Sections are ordered neatly

Images and Media:


 * The already-existing images and maps provide pretty nice visuals. Although more images wouldn't hurt, especially for the new sections that you added

Overall Impressions:


 * The article is very well written. Really good job adding many more very informational sections while staying consistent with the main ideas of the lead