User:Nataliefong00/Tantramar Marshes/Mlroach5 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Nataliefong00)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nataliefong00/Tantramar_Marshes?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nataliefong00/Tantramar_Marshes?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template

Evaluate the drafted changes
The detail and flow of the article is very good. Each section has lots of information, there was a very good and exhaustive list of references and all the citations were set properly with all the information looking like it was properly backed up. I also like that it went into detail with multiple paragraphs in, "Natural Environement" section. How it distinguished in importance with wildlife, keystone species, species at risk, plant life and a section on climate change. The piece about the economy of the marshes was very interesting and definitely important to include to explain to the reader the capitalistic drive/reliance behind environmental degradation. The article is also objective and focuses only on providing information for educating readers. There is a lot of very sufficient information on First Nations history of the area by way of the Mi'kmaq people. It might be a good idea to include the history of colonialism when colonists arrived in the area and how that changed the practices of the Mi'kmaq.

One of the main issues though is grammar as there would sometimes be incorrect use of the grammar and it was noticeable that there may have not been an editing check. There is a sentence in, "National Wildlife Area Status" where half of the sentence is jumped down onto the next line as if it was the start of a new paragraph. There is also missing end brackets and improper period placement as well as improper quotation use.

The next issue is in the list of species inhabiting the park, it would be good if there was a page link to every one of the organisms. If there is not page made for them, at least an indicator to signify that it is a species that doe not have a page made for them. Many things throughout the article did have hyperlinks attached to words too though, so it was not something that the author missed out on altogether.

It may help to include some media such as pictures on the article as well.

Overall the information flows well and doesn't bog the article down with too much detail overload while still keeping the article informative.