User:Sam ERTH/Pulpwood/Andrewglouchkow Peer Review

General info
Sam ERTH
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Sam ERTH/Pulpwood
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Pulpwood

Evaluate the drafted changes
Clarity - The clarity of the article is good and the additions that have been added to the original article provide a lot of valuable information in a clear and concise manner. Sentences are well structured and are easy to read. The lead into the article has been vastly improved and provides insight into the contents of the article.

Structure - The structure is pretty good. In the intro I don't think that each individual sentence should be spaced to as though it were its own paragraph. I'm not sure what the sections on 'hardwood' and 'solid wood products' are providing to the article as they don't seem relevant to pulpwood.

Balanced coverage - The article is balanced in its coverage of pulpwood, providing mainly relevant information on what pulpwood is and how it is ascertained.

Neutrality - Article appears neutral and does not show any clear indication of bias in any direction.

Sources - Overall the article is well sourced, there are a few sentences that still need sources, most notably in the 'sources' section.

Suggestions - There are a lot of different applications that pulpwood is used for. The section 'applications' could use some more information.