User:Octobercosmos/Desert greening/Fevans9 Peer Review

General info
Octobercosmos, Nayebean
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Octobercosmos/ Desert Greening
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi! I know this is still in the starting stages of drafting. Hence, I will be providing feedback on what has been edited so far.

Lead
The lead has been edited and reflects new content has been added. Once reading the new content that was added, it gives a better understanding than the original article did. The information provided in the lead helped me to get a clear understanding of what will be described in the article, it is a very clear and detailed lead.

Content
The content is relevant to the topic and they're up to date. I do think that my peers will expand on the benefits of desert greening, they should be able to find more advantages and information to support what is already listed in the article. Other than that the article doesn't seem to deal with any of Wikipedias equity gaps.

Tone and Balance
The content seems to be neutral, there aren't any heavily biased claims towards a particular position. The article is straightforward and focuses on the topic.

Sources and References
When reading the article, I can already see that there are missing sources. My peers would most likely try to focus on finding papers/sources that can help support claims that are included in the article. As for the edited portion that is in my peers sandbox, each reference are relevant to the topic. The actual article has minimal references, all cited sources did work except for #3 and #4 that says page isn't found. Going through and verifying that the link are all working will also be something helpful my peers can do for their article. Besides that I do like that a youtube video was included in one of the sources and a website in Chinese language, being that Wikipedia articles are seen from globally, I do like that it offers information from different countries.

Organization
The content that was added was clear and easy to read, I do like how my peers shortened but still kept the lead very informative. It doesn't have spelling errors. Since the article is still being worked on, my peers can help to reorganize the sections and include more information to the body of the article. Though what is already in the article does seem to be relevant to the topic.

Images and Media
There has not been any new images or media added as of yet but in the original article it seems to be very little to none images/media. They are well captioned and adhere to Wikipedias copyright regulation. This is definitely an area where my peers can focus on adding to the article, more images that relate to the topic will be a nice touch.

Overall impressions
Overall, the new lead seemed to be more clear than the original one in the actual article. This article will be interesting and very informative once edited and worked by my peers. I can see that they will be adding alot of information and sources to help explain desert greening better. I am excited to learn more and understand the effects from urbanization.