User:Fendragon57/Puritjarra/Smichael263 Peer Review

General info
fendragon57 - ali
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fendragon57/Puritjarra?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template::

Lead
Good lead I liked how you included what traditional aboriginal lands it resides on i feel like that is a very significant detail that is easy to leave out.

Content
findings - this is a very good detailed list of archaeological findings. If you want to you could add more about the findings themselves maybe talk about anything significant the findings show, for example maybe talk about how the different types of rock found could show movement patterns or trade.

also for the findings i think the part about how the site was occupied throughout the pleistocene could be added to the first paragraph saying something like overall this site has lots of archaeological history and has been occupied throughout the pleistocene maybe.

history of research - good start to the section I'm excited to see how you expand on this

Tone and Balance
Article maintains a neutral tone which is great for a wiki article and sounds very professional. The article is chock full of relevant details and so far its an excellent start

Sources and References
Your list of sources and references is extensive and you have a really good amount of sources, excellent job.

Overall impressions
The article is off to a good start you have good info to build off of and you can add lots more! you should feel confident about your content moving forward good luck!

Examples of good feedback
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

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.)