User:Cyn4 sfu/Spatsizi Plateau Wilderness Provincial Park/Joycellyy Peer Review

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
Overall, this is a good Wikipedia page. I appreciated the depth of research you put into this assignment. It provides detailed information about the aspects of history, ecology, First Nation - cultural heritage and recreation. It is a balanced content. I think the history part is strong, as details are provided back to the 18th to late 19th century, and detailed throughout the article. Apart from learning about Spatsizi Plateau Wilderness Provincial Park, I realized that most places are predominantly ordinate from First Nations. I appreciate the effort put into researching and documenting the records, especially since the park I was studying did not provide much information about the First Nations.

The draft currently meets the goal of addressing: How the boundaries and size of the protected area were decided/ Information about what species can be found in the protected area (plants, animals, other species) (information about their population trends)/ Information about First Nations whose traditional and ancestral territory/ies are included in the protected area / the recreation/ Whether the goals that led to the creation of the protected area are being met, and how this is being measured.

For the part of ecology (conservation), I suggest providing more details on large mammal predatory-prey and plant species. It would be good if mention which species are endemic and at risk within the protected area. Additionally, the Stikine Country Protected Area System could be explained in more detail such as What is this? How does it work?

Overall, the reading is easy to follow and understand, which is great! However, It could be better organized, For example, I suggest the "Gladys Lake Ecological Reserve" adding a heading or sub-heading. It seems a bit unclear whether it belongs to ecology or another category, given the line between both. Also, I recommend moving the history part to the second section of the article. For the first paragraph, I suggest it can be more straightforward, for example stating that the provincial park's establishment was in 1975.

The tone of the article is neutral as written without bias toward a particular point of view, and different viewpoints are based on source. I suggested avoiding the use of non-restrictive qualifiers in technical communication, such as "which".

There are 13 sources used in the article. However, some are missing hyperlinks and some of them are not fully cited ( e.g, no. 10). Some appear: "check data values in" in red, to resolve this error, I suggest clicking the "help" button, that error typically occurs due to misplacing the punctuation. If you scroll down the page, there are examples of unacceptable data and how to fix them.

The article provides most of the details of the protected park. It will be better if each data provides more information, for example, recreation- the number of visitors. The article includes perspectives from First Nation and the government. It will be great to add information about management decision-making and whether it comes from First Nations or others.