User:Fendragon57/Puritjarra/Luluzulu1 Peer Review

Lead
- The lead briefly describes the site, and places it in geographical and cultural context by identifying region, nearby population centers, and the aboriginal people on whose land it resides.

- The lead is clear and concise, and overall good, though it could be slightly improved by adding a sentence or two about what Puritjarra is known for as an archaeological site.

Content
- The content is relevant to the topic; it goes into further detail about the features of and artifacts found at Puritjarra, mentioning rock art and stone tools, including thumbnail scrapers and tulas.

- The content is relatively up to date, though the most recent source is still almost 20 years old. Additional more recent content would be a good addition, though it may not be necessary.

- The content is all relevant, and nothing appears to be missing or out-of-place :)

Tone & Balance
- The article is very neutral and balanced, and doesn't seem to have any particular bias in position or viewpoint, to the extent that such bias could even exist.

Sources & References
- The sources are on average between 20-30 years old, but are all reliable, relevant, and thorough.

- Sources written by Mike Smith may be overrepresented

- Links to sources work

Organization
- Content is concise, clear, and easy to read

- There are a few grammatical errors, but those are easily corrected

- Article is brief but paragraphs are clearly delineated and coherent in topic

Images & Media
- None at the moment - maybe add images of rock art or artifacts found at Puritjarra?

New Article Notes
- Subject is notable, and has a good amount of sources relative to its size

- There are no links to other articles - maybe link to Alice Springs, Central Australia, Kukatja People, or Mike Smith

Overall Impressions
‐ I think the article is a great overview of Puritjarra rock shelter and the discoveries there!

- The article can benefit from a few touch-ups, and maybe the addition of images, but is overall good, especially considering it didn't exist previously :)

General info
Fendragon57
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fendragon57/Puritjarra:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

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.)