User:Elasezgin/Montlake Cut/CassieClovis02 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Elasezgin


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Elasezgin/Montlake Cut


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hello!

Lead:

The article's lead is concise and easy to understand. It states where Montlake Cut is located and its purpose, but does not provide much insight on what other topics regarding Montlake Cut the article will be discussing. Overall, the lead gives the reader good introductory information about Montlake Cut but could be improved by adding some short information regarding sections discussed further down in the article.

Content:

I really like how different sections were added to the article such as the history, environmental impacts, and present day information about Montlake Cut. This made the article much easier to follow and navigate as a reader who had little information about Montlake Cut when first going to read the article. I think that all of the sections have relevant information that is also up to date. The history section really stood out to me with the information that was added regarding the relationship between the indigenous and Montlake Cut. I think that having the history section as well as the present day section is a great way to let readers see the full circle of the Montlake Cut. If possible, slightly more information could be added to both the environmental impacts section along with the present day section to balance out the article with the history section being considerably longer. Overall, the content that was added really improved the article as a whole.

Tone and Balance:

This article has great tone and balance throughout. I didn't notice any bias or persuasion in the tone and I really enjoy how you added more background on the Duwamish.

Sources and References:

After looking through the sources, I think that they are are current and reputable. I do think that a few more sources would not hurt and could possibly add more content to the article as well. I also think that more sources could be cited throughout the history section of the article. Overall, good citations.

Organization:

The organization of this article is good in the fact that it is well organized and written. I did notice some possible grammar errors throughout the history section of the article that should be reviewed. In addition, the word "cut" is capitalized at some points during the article and then not capitalized at others. It would be good to make a universal decision throughout the article regarding the capitalization of this word. Other than these minor things, the organization is great.

Images and Media:

I think that some more current images could be added to the article to give the reader a better picture in their mind of Montlake Cut if they have never been to Seattle before. I also think that a photo of the University of Washington rowing team could be added to represent the present day section. I think that the photos that are in the article now are good as well.

Overall Impressions:

Overall, I really enjoyed reading and reviewing this article. I was able to learn more about Montlake Cut and the history of it. My main recommendations for this article would be to review the history section and possibly add more citations in there as well. Overall, this article has made great progress and I can't wait to see the end result!''' '''