User:Naeim9146/Peer review request

'''Dear thebloombloom - my class expects me to follow this guideline to peer review my article. Please keep this in mind when you review mine.'''

Thanks for doing this.

Peer review

Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, the lead only mentions the first section. The second section, on the major controversies that dogged the project, is only hinted at via the mention of the company's bankruptcy. Perhaps a word or two alluding to these could be included here?  I've tried to do this . Good point. Thanks
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Fairly concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Solwara-1 section:
 * In the sentence on the cancellation of the ship's contract, the reasons for this cancellation are not mentioned. While they are referenced in the Financial subheading in the Controversy section, a summary reference here would be helpful. FIXED THIS
 * The third paragraph begins "The project faced steady opposition..."; what is meant by "steady"? Since the project's inception? By what groups? Where? (PNG? Canada? etc.) Qualify the use of the word "steady".
 * Who is Deep Sea Finance Ltd.? Where are they located? A sentence or two about them and their political and corporate affiliations would be useful.
 * Controversy section:
 * Environmental subheading:
 * Provide an example or two of the members of the "coalition of Canada-based environmental groups"?  Ive done this for the only member of coalition that had a Wikipedia hyperlink - mining watch canada
 * Provide an example or two of the issues that were raised by the comprehensive independent reviews? Who conducted these independent reviews? - FOUND LINK _ https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0308597X22000537?token=2567CDB517F13E28EEC25B9DBB49F7184EF8C10657C1D99FC01CB7AC295678460403FD15BDDED021E5F26E04DDCA615D&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20230413022127
 * GOOOOOOD SOURCEEEE!!!!!! BINGO
 * You say the hydrothermal vents were considered "rare and little studied ecosystem types". Who considers them so? If they are indeed rare, perhaps you could cite some statistical evidence of their rarity.
 * Fixed this by removing little studies.
 * SAME LINK ABOVE FOR RARITY
 * MAYBE - https://www.fauna-flora.org/app/uploads/2020/03/FFI_2020_The-risks-impacts-deep-seabed-mining_Report.pdf
 * State an example of the "vocal opposition" of local groups. Perhaps you could cite a local news source.
 * Ive done this
 * https://www.huffpost.com/entry/deep-sea-mining-and-the-controversial-solwara-1-in_b_5964dbe9e4b0deab7c646bb5
 * https://www.abc.net.au/pacific/programs/pacificbeat/nautilus-set-to-retain-png-mining-licence/10965498
 * Provide an example of the negative impact the Solwara Warriors claimed to be seeing. Where did they make this claim? Cite - source for this??? - https://www.pngattitude.com/2012/11/public-opposition-delays-solwara-1-deep-sea-mine-project.html decent local source
 * The last sentence says "given the number of mines planned"; how many mines were planned? I DONT KNOW - but my citation says that someone had an issue with the number of mines planned: Dr. Catherine Coumans of Mining Watch Canada
 * Social subheading:
 * Fix the veto rights link to lead to the Wikipedia article Veto instead. I have done this. Thanks.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The perspective of local groups could be better represented; this can be addressed by responding to the questions re:content above.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * No; but include materials available on SEDAR as additional references, and/or correct the incomplete citation entries #3, #4, #10, and #18 Ive done this. Thanks
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No; images that could be added (if they are found to be available in the public domain): a press release photograph of the government announcing the project, a photograph of on-site operations in progress, a photograph of the protest presentation in Canada, a photograph of a local protest in PNG (of the Solwara Warriors, for example) Really tried to find pictures with appropriate Creative Commons license - Could not find any that had the license. This would have been great.. but cant do this. Ive asked people for permission but no one has gotten back to me.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes (so far)
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes (so far)
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes (so far)

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for 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?
 * Yes; there are presently two reliable secondary sources cited: #8 The Economist and #15 Marine Policy. Additional sources would be ideal, and can be listed as such.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * No; include a related link box at the bottom of the article, specifically the same two link boxes at the bottom of this article: Deep sea mining. Additionally, in the Deep Sea Mining article, find existing references to Nautilus/Solwara-1/etc. and link them to your own article. Ive done this (Ive also included a "See also" section.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The added content is more detailed, up to date, and provides a balanced overview of the topic
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * See above

Examples of good feedback
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.


 * Peer review of "Homemaking"
 * Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Additional Resources
Check out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions.