User:Kaljumaegi/Newton Slave Burial Ground/MJ Fielder-Jellsey Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Kaljumaegi


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaljumaegi/Newton_Slave_Burial_Ground?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * does not exist!

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead: The lead is well-written and concise. However, the initial sentence introduces Barbados, and not so much the slave burial ground the article is focused on. There could be some structural rearranging to start with the burial ground, and then introduce Barbados and the way its economy was dependent on slave labor. The lead also could use a sentence or two detailing the sections of the article, without too much information about the sections themselves, but just a brief mention so the reader knows and more of the article is reflected.

Content: This looks good! This article is addressing an under-represented group and discusses a burial ground of people that before was unavailable on Wikipedia. This article is doing its part to further the accessibility of histories that seem out of reach. If the information is available, however, it would interesting to read about when use of the burial ground ended and why. It would also be interesting to read more about where, how, and why the life expectancy and the infant mortality rate at the site are in conflict/contrast the historical record.

Tone and Balance: This also looks good; the tone is neutral and does not support one side or another.

Sources and References: The sources look good - reliable and academic, the links work perfectly, the references section is neat.

Organization: This looks good!

Images and Media: Since we have not learned how to incorporate images yet, I don't think you need to worry about this section!

New Article: This article has plenty of reliable sources and links to other Wikipedia pages, but it could use a section detailing some of the quantitative aspects - how large is the burial ground? how many bodies are there? when and by who was it excavated?

Overall Impressions: The content added is clear, interesting, and presents facts about the burial ground without any bias toward any party involved. As mentioned above, there could potentially be more information added, but this is a really good start for creating a brand new article about a subject that represents an under-discussed group.

This looks really good so far, Kalju!