User:Ktrkeller/Yellow Bluffs Site/Sabajian 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)
 * Ktrkeller
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Ktrkeller/Yellow Bluffs Site

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
'''- This lead is really informative and concise and a great set up for the rest of the article. However, I would switch the last two sentences into the beginning. So the lead would then read:'''

"The Yellow Bluffs archeological site was occupied by people of the Middle Woodland Havana Tradition and is comprised of a habitation area and various burial mounds. This site can be found in Logan County, central Illinois and is closely linked to the Sangamon River drainage network. It is one of the larger known sites in the Sangamon River valley.The primary occupation of the Yellow Bluffs site, be it continuous or discrete, can be traced back to 200 B.C.E through 400 C.E. but the site represents activity from numerous prehistoric eras."

- I think maybe one more sentence can be added in terms of significance to introduce the rest of the article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
'''- I think the content is really well organized. It goes from history and mapping to site occupation which really emphasizes why the site was so significant to all different people in all different periods of time. It is a great way to set up the rest of the article for when the actual site and artifacts are talked about. I think the section that speaks of artifacts should be a separate section from the site occupation to really highlight the significance of both of those areas.'''

- I think it is really great that there are many dates and periods added into the content to give readers a reference and there is also background information of features of the site as well.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
'''- The tone is very neutral and informative. It is insightful and straight to the point and gives readers facts throughout the whole thing. The facts are mostly followed with significant which is extremely important and something I will use when writing my article.'''

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
'''- Coincides well with the source of information from the Jackson article. That article isn't really split up into sections so I think the student did a good job of pulling apart valuable information and putting it into clearer sections.'''

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
'''- Very well organized, but as I said before, I think the artifacts should be in a separate sections and more should be added to the section titled "site occupation." The order of the sections is very informative.'''

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
- N/A

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?

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
'''- For a draft this article is really well written and informational. I think it will be organized and efficient article once it is all tied together and it will flow very smoothly together more than it already does so well!'''