User:Flowerflee/Colville River (Washington)/Kari's username Peer Review

General info
Flowerflee
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Flowerflee/Colville River (Washington)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Colville River (Washington)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Wow, I learned a lot from your article; here is so much information here! To start, I will say I have a couple very minor observations: First - I noticed several subjects referenced in the article actually had articles themselves, but weren't actually linked. I would encourage you to consider linking the following articles to your own:


 * Selkirk Mountains
 * Pend Oreille River
 * Cascade Mountains
 * Ricky Mountains
 * Ammonia
 * Ice sheets
 * Fort Colville
 * United States Geological Survey
 * Spokane, Washington
 * Colville National Forest

Second - I don't think "Water Waste Treatment Plants" should be capitalized on its first mention in the article - I believe it becomes a proper noun only when preceded by "Chewelah" or "Colville".

Third - I think there's a way to drag and drop your map widget/thing into your infobox so it appears under the infobox header. My most emphatic suggestions involve the references section: I noticed the reference "Colville River Dissolved Oxygen Total Maximum Daily Load" appears three times; I believe deleting reference numbers 8 and 10 in the body of the article and selecting "re-use" in the citation options will allow you to use its first appearance as reference #7 repeatedly throughout the article.

I think the link for reference #5, "Colville River, The Columbia Gazetteer of North America" is broken, it redirects to a website called Bartleby. Similarly, the link for reference #6, "Upper Columbia Subbasin Overview" is broken and redirects to a "Page Not Found" message.

Lastly - would there be any way to provide a link to the PDFs or articles used in your last 5 references? I believe this would make your sources easier for the community to review. My other observations: I feel like this is a very comprehensive article with a great deal of information. I'm very impressed that you were able to find so much quality information, and you convey it in easy-to-understand terms. I felt like you summarized the information in your own words, and you did a great job defining new vocabulary whenever it was introduced. I also really appreciate that you included the section on current projects. As a side-note, I am wondering how the heck you added references to your infobox; I tried to do this in my Newman Lake article and just could not figure it out!

Overall, your article is a fantastic read and you should be proud!