User:HeatherSchimming/William Augustus Bowles/Gg808 Peer Review

General info
User:HeatherSchimming
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:HeatherSchimming/William Augustus Bowles
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * William Augustus Bowles
 * William Augustus Bowles

Evaluate the drafted changes
Content

Lead


 * Not updated but concise and accurate

Early Life


 * Clarified information from the original page to be more accurate and cited specific, credible sources
 * Expanded greatly upon existing content
 * All content is directly related to Bowles' life and career, very relevant!
 * Nothing seems extraneous or like it should just be linked instead of listed directly in the article

Military Involvement and Introduction to the Creeks


 * Very thorough but still concise and reader-friendly

1791 Arrest and Deportation


 * Good start of adding new content
 * Good section- main piece of information

Organization


 * Added multiple new sections in a rational order
 * Good breakdown of what's most important
 * Easy to follow, makes sense while reading
 * Grammar: some sentence fragments- assuming that's because this is still a draft!
 * "Spain viewed Bowles as a constant threat to the monopoly they operated in Florida. Often debating upon Bowles several imprisonments to either killing him outright or giving him a salary of a military officer."
 * Good linking to other Wikipedia pages in the Early Life and San Marcos Fort sections, could be added to the other body sections to help provide context on various locations and groups
 * Ex. Conde de Floridablanca, Lord Dunmore, Creek Nation, etc.

Tone and Balance

 * Tone: overall neutral and informative, not biased or persuasive
 * "Spain viewed Bowles as a constant threat to the monopoly they operated in Florida"- maybe could be more specific (ex. who in Spain? Specific government leaders?) so it sounds more neutral

Sources and References

 * All new content is cited
 * LOTS of citations throughout the article- very specific!
 * Wide variety of sources
 * Some recent sources, some older sources- all credible and academic
 * All links work and are accessible

Overall: This is a great draft! You've added so much information already and it is laid out in a very user-friendly manner. You've found some really good sources.