User:L06j02/Barcelona Tourism Pollution/Greenstudents123 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?
 * L06j02


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:L06j02/Barcelona_Tourism_Pollution?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

This article has a good introduction that describes context of Barcelona and sets up the point of rest of the article. The way it starts with a more broad description followed by the specificity of cruise ship tourism allows the reader to clearly follow the train of thought. It is very concise and efficient.

Content

The content is very relevant. Tourism is a big cause of pollution, and this article accurately describes why. It focuses on both environmental and economic impacts of cruise ship tourism, ad well as the social aspect of cultural exchange. All of these topics are important and have a big impact on the population. The only section I would tweak is the infrastructure section. The content is more about popularity and social rights, and there is not really any detail about the infrastructure itself. I do not think there needs ti be a description of the infrastructure, but I would change the title of the section to something like "Cruise Ship Popularity".

Tone and Balance

This article does not push opinions nor comes off as biased.

Sources and References

More sources are needed. There are 2 sources listed but they are the same source. Also, they are from 2016, which isn't too old but I would try to find something from 2020 and on. I would add at least 2 more sources.

Organization

This article is well organized and easy to read. The sections make sense separately as they are, and the title of each allows the reader to understand the point of each paragraph. No gramatical or spelling errors.

For New Articles Only

This paper does not meet the notability requirements, as more sources are required. It is not an exhaustive list, nor does it accurately represent all available information. The article does not link to other articles.

Overall

I think this article is well written and informative. However, more sources are needed. Once those sources are found and integrated properly into this article it will be great.