User:GonFreecss999/Great Dismal Swamp/Catsdwa Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

GonFreecss999, Louistheyounger


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GonFreecss999/Great_Dismal_Swamp?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Great Dismal Swamp

Evaluate the drafted changes
(For reference Great Dismal Swamp == GDS).

-Lead: Contains basically nothing about WHY we care about the GDS (There's a very high likelihood of someone clicking on GDS, then reading the lead, and then reading "history", and then clicking off the page). We should at least introduce the fascinating/intriguing history of the GDS before/during the 3 dry paragraphs on location and "current" aspects of the swamp. (Not that you don't already know this, just want to drill it in).

-I like the idea of a literature section.

-The history section looks good in content. I would like to see more citations used from the 5 sourced at the bottom of the page. Try to rewrite many of the sentences away from passive voice: "was seen", "was fueled", "were led", "is evident" etc.. I know it's difficult especially since we are using documents talking about old times, but the phrases like "held a place" and "eager to keep"  keep the reader's attention better.

-I agree (indirectly) that the Preservation and the Today section don't really need to be updated. Maybe some updates on passive voice and structure overall, but that is a low priority.

I think y'all are on the right track. Keep it up.