User:Sitekm2972/Great Northern Expedition/El.Guapo6564 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Sitekm2972


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sitekm2972/Great_Northern_Expedition?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Great Northern Expedition

Evaluate the drafted changes
The article that the group decided to work on is a C-Class article (which is impressive that the group took this article on), so there was already a lot of good and relevant information for them to work with. The edits in the sandbox made it clear what they know need fixed, what they will add, and what changes need to be made to the article.

The information that has been added by the group is relevant to the topic and the section that is being edited. Although the information added in "The academic component" is good, the section in the original article needs to have more sources.

Based on the key the group left, there was not much information added by the group to review. With what was given, the information is relevant and the tone is neutral. Overall, there needs to be more citations in the article, because for the amount of information that is given, there are not many sources, or even sentences, that are cited. The group did well identifying what they think needs to be added and what they think would be good information to provide for the article; now they just need to add it in a neutral tone and find proper citations to put it in the article.

Peer Review Response
I agree that the academic component section needs to have more sources for sure. I appreciate that the reviewer noticed the article needs more sources based on the amount in the article that is stated but is not cited am that we had already pointed that out. Providing more citations/fixing sources is one of the main things that we planned on doing aside from adding more information. Given that there are only 8 sources in the article and 2 of them are the same source, so really 7 there is a need for more citations. We have 3 sources currently to add and a few on the way. Further into the project we will go in and cite the already stated facts if/when we find a source that verifies them.