User:R. Culverwell/Manis Mastodon Site/Seattleair Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

R. Culverwell


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Manis Mastodon Site - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
I didn't see any edits in the sandbox, so I will be reflecting on the article!

This article is definitely short and sweet!

I think for the lead you could add a little bit more which would help with its flow as it seems a little bit bullet pointy at the moment. (Smooth over the details so it's not so jumpy). I think you could also potentially add another couple of headers which would help section off some evidence into chunks, while also giving more of a general timeline through the use of headings. There are definitely some really interesting sentences in this article and think you could expand on some of those details. It's good to have a short and to-the-point article, but some parts seemed too jumpy to me. There were also some detailed sentences that didn't seem to have any references attached, so would be good to add a few more of those (might be easy enough to look at the surrounding references and do a quick search through those articles for the correct information so you can site it!).

There are also 2 pages in the article that don't seem to exist. I don't know if you just remove those links or if it's fine to leave, but worth mentioning. I am also quite curious about the last little paragraph...what is the most recent analysis? (I know you didn't add all these things so it may be hard to touch on all of them).

I think you could add quite a bit more evidence/details to this article. Also smoothing out some of the jumpy parts (when it just mentions fact after fact without much additional explanation) or places where they mention a lot of dates (that's also something that was a little confusing to me) could help the article.