User:Jordanminer/Urban rail transit in Africa/Racheltlee 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? Jordanminer
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Urban rail transit in Africa

Content
The content is a little vague, should include more statistics/numbers/history/facts that could explain more about transit in Africa.

In this paragraph:

In recent decades , Africa has seen a   the potential economic growth has been untapped with the  growth of extractive industries such as mining and oil drilling. Many of these mines are located in  the   several  land-locked nations in the African interior. Aware of the environmental toll that road-transport requires, nations and foreign actors are realizing the potential of rail transit in Africa. Besides economic incentives, urbanization has  fueled    been fueling   the growth of mega cities across the globe. Lagos, Nairobi, Cairo, Kinshasa, Luanda, Dar es Salaam, Johannesburg, and Abidjan, etc, either are all mega cities across Africa that are either already at 10 million people, or soon on track to surpass that number.

I've noted some grammatical errors but I'm a little confused what the first two sentences have to do with rail networks in Africa. I think more information should be added to explain how mining and oil drilling is related to transportation. In the last two sentences, you should connect why urbanization fuels greater transportation investment - it's a little difficult for the reader to understand right now.

Tone and Balance
Tone is neutral.

Sources and References
The sources seem reliable but make sure they're being fully cited at the bottom (I think some of the citations are missing information).

Organization
A few grammatical errors:

Urban rail transit in Africa-Rail transit in Africa has taken on many different forms. Some of these transit systems are older and more developed, such as the metro in Cairo,  opened in 1987.  While o   O thers  are  much more recent, such as the light rail in Adidas Ababa in 2017 . A variety of technology has been used ranging from light-rail, bus rapid-transit, and commuter-rail etc.  For several decades,  Africa  for several decades  saw minimal investment in rail infrasttructure,  but  in recent years   due to urban population growth   investment in rail networks has increased, largely spurred by urban population growth.

"the Independence Period" should have an external link to another Wikipedia page, and you should define what years you are including in that reference.

General comment: you use the word "these" a lot and it would help the article flow better if you changed your word variation/sentence variation. For example, instead of "These networks declined over the next few decades, due to lower demand and lower levels of investment. Like many other aspects of African governments, these became overstaffed." you could write:

"Heavy rail networks declined over the next few decades, due to lower demand and lower levels of investment. Like other aspects of many African governments during this time period, transportation structures were understaffed and neglected."

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

New Article Evaluation
Good linking in the graphs, but also considering adding links in the body paragraphs parts.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
The graph is really interesting and I thought it was a really good idea! I was a little confused what the "code" and "remarks" part in the graph meant. Other than that, please see the comments above (a few grammatical problems).