User:Morgans02/Water politics/Vechilco 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

 * Analyzing morgans02
 * User:Morgans02/Water politics

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * I don't see many edits to the lead, however it is also a very lengthy original article so it is possible I'm missing it.
 * It does have a nice introduction to the Mexico section, describing pollution and climate change.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * The content is mostly up to date.
 * All of the content is related to the original article in some way and it flows very nicely.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * The content that was added is neutral and doesn't favor a certain point of view.
 * No persuasion was used throughout the addition to the article.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * All of the sources are tagged multiple times throughout the writing to show where she got her information from.
 * The sources are mostly current, but one I noticed was a bit outdated to 2004.
 * The links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * The writing is easy to read and contains a lot of factual information.
 * I didn't notice any grammatical or spelling mistakes throughout my reading.
 * The content is well organized. The first paragraph provides a nice introduction to the core facts and information of the piece.

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


 * No images or media were used.

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?