User:Sam Wege/Caral/YumoLu Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Sam Wege


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Caral
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead:

The lead gives a lot of information and is concise. A few more suggestions would be: 1) consider briefly summarize the content under the "Archaeological Findings" section; 2) probably remove the final paragraph talking about the fishing city Áspero or El Áspero, or elaborate more on its relations with Caral (Is it part of the larger Caral? Maybe this short paragraph should be moved elsewhere?)

Content:

Content is up-to-date and relevant to the topic.

Tone and Balance:

The article in written in a balanced tone

Sources and References:

The article is backed by sources written by a diverse spectrum of writers. The links to these sources also work fine. However, the reliability of some sources should be noted. Many citations are from online magazines such as Science Alert, NYTimes, The Guardian, etc. These could potentially be replaced by better sources because I saw quite a few articles about Caral on Gould Library Catalyst.

Some citations are needed for paragraph 4 and 5 directly under "Archaeological Findings" and paragraph 1 under "Geoglyph."

Organization:

The organization of the article is clear. The content is well-written, and no grammatical errors stood out.

Images and Media:

Images are incorporated to the article to effective convey information.

Overall Impressions:

I might be wrong but based on the page history, I think Sam haven't done major content editing yet.? Above is the evaluation of the existing article.