User:Hdebus/Vaseux-Bighorn National Wildlife Area/Kuriffin Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Hdebus, Wiki SFU CSR, Laurenmonroe, Lomsefil, and Kai-tinker


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hdebus/Vaseux-Bighorn_National_Wildlife_Area?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
There is a clear and concise introduction of the topic. I would suggest to combine the content of "Background" and "Attractions" within the "Vaseux-Bighorn National Wildlife Area" part to form a "Lead" part. And the summary of all other subtitles in this draft could also be added in lead part. The Lead needs more details to summarize the structure of the article, and this is also where our own articles need to be improved.

The content of the draft is relevant to the topic and the information source is up-to-date. The draft covers climate, resources, history, first nation, geography, and regions in a very comprehensive way. I only have few suggestions for the organization.

The tone of draft is nuetral and unbiased. I would suggest to add more about geograhy.

The sources cited in draft are thorough and authoritive. All the links are available. I could not look for better article about the topic. But I would suggest to paraphrase more, and some of the references (#9--#16) are from the same source that could be combined together.

The organization of draft is well-written and well-spell. I would suggest to make the subtittles more consice. Also, in the part of "Wether the Goals that led to the Creation of this Protected Area are Being Met, and How this is Being Measured" and "History and Natural Resources", contents are a little bit extensive, which could be organized more. For example, the goals of creation of protected area could be divided by numbers to form a list. Further, the content of history could be seperated with natrual resouces to make every part more clear and aesthetic.

The draft requires some images or praph. (I had a problem inserting images while writing my own draft. I downloaded the climate data from the website and created a graph. But when I inserted it into the wiki, I was prompted that the operation was not allowed.)

The overall draft is really good. I overlooked a lot of key parts in doing my own draft that are well represented in this article. I think it will be a wonderful job after a brief revision on organization and images.