User:Bwooddell/Concord Gabbro-Syenite Complex/Longka2 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Bwooddell


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Bwooddell/sandbox


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

Content and Tone
The organization is good, and the lead is detailed. The article is neutral, and the facts are supported. Everything in this article is relevant to the topic at hand. However, I feel that more information on the rock unit is needed to make this draft complete. The only major subsection of this article discusses modeling, and I think adding a subsection for location and geologic situation, formation history, and petrology of the unit would improve the article.

Images
There are no images in this article yet. Consider adding a geologic map or photo of an outcrop.

Issues
There is an issue with the references section, as one of the sources is not included in the correct location. This has created two 'source 1s', making it difficult to determine where the information for facts cited at source 1 came from. The doi for source three does not work, but the other link works fine. I corrected a grammatical error in the first paragraph, changing apart to a part.

Overall Thoughts
Overall, the article is good so far. The organization (aside from the references section), tone, and facts are on point. However, what it needs most is more information. As you add to the article, consider:

What is the main minerology of the unit?

Which units border your unit?

Are there any trends in trace elements?

Are there any notable structures like faults within your unit?

How did this unit form? What events helped create it?

An image of an outcrop or geologic map of the unit would also greatly improve the article.

Try to find more sources published in 2000 and onward.

Fix the organization issue with the references section so that there are not two 'source 1s'