User:K8Carleton/Moundville Archaeological Site/Votawh Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

K8Carleton


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * Lead
 * The lead is a little long, but it's informative and has good sourcing.
 * Content
 * The history section, especially about preservation, would be better if it came later in the article, with more information providing context earlier on. Otherwise the article seems a little sparse: what information is there is relevant and useful, but there isn't a lot of detail. There are a few points where the information seems a little peripheral:
 * Tone & Balance
 * The article as written seems pretty neutral. I don't have any particular problems with it, as it relies heavily on outside sources and is descriptive without taking a stance on the information presented.
 * Organization
 * The geography section is kind of weird to include, in the sense that it's not connected to the rest of the article. The order of the rest is good, as it takes the reader through the site in terms of how information about it was discovered.
 * Sources & References
 * This article is VERY well sourced!
 * Images & Media
 * There's only a handful of photos in the article. It would benefit from some more, especially of the mounds, because 1 of the 2 photos isn't very strong.