User:Mdivestea/Southwest, Syracuse/Annikaholmberg Peer Review

General info
mdivestea
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mdivestea/Southwest, Syracuse
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Southwest, Syracuse:

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead - I think the lead is great. It provides so much more information than what the original article does and paints a much greater picture of the area. There is somewhat of a breakdown of the upcoming content to be anticipated, but I don't think any changes need to be made.

Content - There is a great deal of content that provides a really good picture of what the area is really like. I think that the additional details in the geography and demographics section is super helpful. I think it enhances the scope of the article and I don't think any changes need to be made. The only thing I would add is a map if that's possible, I noticed the section at the bottom but I wasn't sure what it was supposed to link to. In terms of organization, I would move history to right after the lead, as this will add some more context before going into the breakdowns of Parks & Rec and Community-Based Organizations.

Sources/References - The variety of sources is great. There is a mix of official government reports, local news publications, as well as a census breakdown for the demographics. Overall, the information in this article is really great, and the writing style is straightforward and unbiased.