User:Melancosmic/Manchester State Park (Washington)/JLR02 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Melancosmic


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Melancosmic/Manchester State Park (Washington)


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Manchester State Park (Washington)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead - You have added enough content to the article that having a lead now makes sense. It's a concise summary that includes key facts about the park itself and enough history to understand why the park is relevant/notable to Manchester as a community. The only thing I noticed is that you have some history statements that are not attached to any source. These might be covered by sources in the body of the article, or you might be able to find one or two more sources that summarize the history of the park. Overall, though, the lead is a good introduction to the article!

Content - All the new content has an appropriate tone and is relevant. You cover quite a bit of history in a concise, understandable way and use reliable sources - I grew up in Manchester and this answered several questions I've had for a while, which is a good indication to me that the information you have added is good! The only thing that might be missing is a summary of the park's history from 1970-today. I don't think there's quite as much content to cover since it isn't a military base anymore, but a short paragraph about more recent happenings could help the article feel more well-rounded. Similarly, the "activities and amenities" section is a good thing to add to the article, but it feels a little unbalanced being so short. I know the park hosts summer camps, research projects, etc - things like this could be something to add to flesh out that section a bit?

Tone/Balance - The tone of the article is appropriately neutral. I don't have a ton of feedback here - everything looks good and doesn't try to persuade readers to any particular ideas.

Sources/References - I'm honestly kind of impressed you found this many good sources about the park! I have tried to do casual research on it before and haven't seemed to come up with much. Everything you have is solid, but I noticed a lot of your links are to the WA Parks Foundation - that's not bad, but a little more diversity might help you round out your info with things other than historical facts. Newspapers like the Kitsap Sun, Port Orchard Independent, etc would be a good place to start. That's just to add more info though - everything you already have is good!

Organization - I like how you've expanded on the one-paragraph stub to add real sections. Like I mentioned before, the sections feel a little unbalanced right now with the "History" one being much longer. I think this makes sense considering the topics, but adding a bit more to the Activities/current park use section would perhaps even it out a bit. As far as the writing, everything looks good to me overall. I made a couple of copy-edits to make things more clear/concise, but didn't any issues regarding the actual content of the article. Nice work!

Images - No issues here. Your images (which you appear to have taken yourself? Impressive if you just had these on hand, or if you managed to travel to Manchester for them recently) depict places you mention in the article and illustrate key points well.

Overall - Great job expanding and improving this article! You've taken it from a one-paragraph stub to a solid small article about a local landmark. The text you have added already is concise and relevant in describing the topic. I think you can continue to improve it by adding a little more content regarding recent history and current use, but you are definitely on the right track here. Keep it up!