User:MadiSalinas1/Rapids


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Are some areas under- or over-developed?
 * The article is relevant to this topic. I think some areas such as the classes are underdeveloped.
 * Is it written neutrally?
 * It is written neutrally.
 * Does each claim have a citation? Are the citations reliable
 * When opening the page, a notice about the citations pop up. It says how this article may have some incorrect information due to lack of unverified sources.
 * Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)?
 * no

What can you add?

I would add more about the different classes of rapids. They only go in death about the class IV ones.