User:Jencool17/Woods and Caples General Store/Captainq25 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jencool17


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jencool17/Woods_and_Caples_General_Store?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Woods and Caples General Store

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Consider these questions:


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?

Jen,

Great additions to the article stub!

First, I wanted to address a couple technical errors. For one, the first reference that you use the most appears to have an issue surrounding the date. I would also change the title of "Early History" to "History" for simplification since there is no further discussion of history. I would also try to add more links to other pages, such as the word "mercantile" in the first paragraph.

The lead is quite good! I would make sure to remove the first section you have titled "Woods and Caples General Store" as this will be the intro paragraph not a separate section.

Also, regarding sourcing, you do a great job supporting every statement. However, if there are two statements directly after one another that are related and from the same source, you only need to cite the source once. You cite source 3 an extra time in the first sentence of "Early History."

In the architecture section, you say "The building’s architecture allows for it to stand out in Forest Grove’s downtown layout." This is newspaper article style writing with a slight hint of opinion. This sentence needs to be reworked or removed to be factual in an encyclopedia type manner. Additionally in the architecture section, you only need to cite source 1 once for the whole description of the architecture.

- Captainq25 (talk) 21:26, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

I would also try to use multiple sources to support statements if at all possible. It increases the certainty of those statements.

- Captainq25 (talk) 21:38, 3 June 2021 (UTC)