User:Fable1119/Mata Menge/KirstenSW821 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Fable1119


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Fable1119/New sandbox
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Mata Menge
 * Mata Menge

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

After reading the user's sandbox that is mainly about a resource found for "Volcanic Activity," I can tell that there is more information that can definitely be applied to this article. After reviewing the first sandbox specific to this article, before I moved over to the new sandbox for the article, I noticed that there were multiple leading questions and statements that the user, I assume, is looking more into detail with. I see that the Wikipedia user has a lot of good statements to further their study, and I think the beginning resource and paragraph that went with it about "Volcanic Activity," is a great start.

To go more into detail about the sandbox work that the user has, is like I mentioned above, a great start to their contributions to this article. As I saw that the main article this user is referring to is Mata Menge, the article itself has very little information or topics to go add too. With this in mind, I thought that it was a brilliant idea to begin a new section for the article, as the user did with their "Volcanic Activity" section. For this new section added, I believe that the content is relevant to the rest of the article, and that it is neutral. There is no overpowering statements that make the user seem bias, and the new section added is easy to read, with multiple statements that are clearly referred to the research article that it is based off of.

The strengths of this addition is that the new section that the user wants to add is very clear, and to the point, which should make anybody that is reading this Wikipedia article understand exactly what they are reading. This addition is a great start to this article, and I think that the user should now focus their attention to their other sandbox that had all the questions and the main statements that will help add to the article as well. The statements that are included in that original sandbox are also great sources to find information about, and they also seem very relevant to the topic with no biased opinion. Finding more sources will definitely improve the content of the article and it will make the writing easier. Having more statements and sections added that attribute to multiple reliable sources will make the statements more true and neutral. Just keep researching and finding sources, and I think this article will come along very well!