User:Cgpitt/Bog body/Mswintosky Peer Review

General info

 * Reviewing Bog Body Article edited by Cgpitt
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Bog body

Lead evaluation
Cgpitt has added a reference along with a new piece of information pertaining to the acidic conditions of bogs credited to the preservation of the bog bodies. The lead section is fairly well written with sufficient references and sets up the article well, generally outlining the sections to follow.

Content
Guiding questions:

Content evaluation
Cgpitt is planning to add more information later in the week and has added a snippet to the lead section as noted above. Additionally there are many references mentioned to be used to add more pertinent information (that seem legitimate) and will add to the strength of this article. They specifically mention adding references to the "notable bog bodies" section, which is severely lacking.

Currently, the article could use some additions to the archaeological techniques section as the discovery and processing of these bog bodies is absolutely a meticulous process that requires many steps to maintain the preservation once these mummified bodies are exposed to air and the elements.

The article seems to equally represent multiple geographic areas where these bodies have been discovered. There is a section with the heading of "North America", but there are no headings pertaining to the other bodies mentioned (i.e. denmark, germany, ireland, the netherlands, europe in general). Maybe look into segmented some of these mentions into their own sections with their respective geographical headings.

Tone and balance evaluation
I don't see any direct issues with the tone and balance.

Sources and references evaluation
As mentioned above, Cgpitt has mentioned that they will be adding some references to enhance the article, especially in the notable bog bodies section. I think this will be sufficient as this article has many legitimate references used throughout. Obviously, if/when Cgpitt adds any new information, they should reference everything new.

Organization evaluation
As noted above, maybe add some separate sections for the geographical areas mentioned in this article and reorganize the specific information listed into these sections.

Images and media evaluation
Maybe look into adding references to the photos already present in the article. Would adding new photos be helpful? There are already so many.

Overall evaluation
This article is definitely not perfect, but Cgpitt has some clear and good starting point plans for improvement upon the content and references of this article. I think they will improve upon this article and have some good stuff to start with. They may want to look into fixing some of the page's external links as that is a point of revision mentioned on the talk page.