User:Hmwhmw02/Averhoff Reservoir/RachKingg Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username)
 * Hmwhmw02
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Hmwhmw02/Averhoff Reservoir

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the intro sentence covers the articles topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, it briefly covers the information in the rest of the article
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, the reservoir and the company that manages it is not mentioned again later in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is a little long, but it includes good information.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, to my knowledge
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is a lot of information bout fishing, but I don't think that anything is missing.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, this article is pretty neutral

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * There are no references for the first four paragraphs
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * All of the resources are on fishing, there is not a wide variety.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, to the best of my knowledge.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, all the ones I checked worked.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I can see
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * There is only the lead and one major section- the information could probably be better organized if more sections were included.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * There are no included images.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * No images included
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No images included