User:Sophiegeary/Seattle Aquarium/Alyssadebragga Peer Review

General info
Sophiegeary
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Sophiegeary/Seattle Aquarium
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Seattle Aquarium

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hi Sophie! I just want to start with saying great work! You are doing an amazing job and I noticed you've put a lot of work into this project.

Lead:

It looks like your lead and introductory sentences are the same from the original article to the sandbox draft, but I don't see it as a problem at all as it's super straight forward and what you want from a lead. One thing I noticed off the bat after the lead was the statistic on the right-hand side by the under the image of annual visitors. It's a number from 2009. Consider updating this as this is a really old statistic right at the beginning of the article. Other than this, fantastic opening to the article.

Content:

Great content additions. I like how you clearly added and labeled the different piers. This is a super clear and strong addition to the article. Your new content seems really up to date. I noticed you referenced the Seattle Aquarium directly, and I take it their site is up to date so that's good. No missing content from what I'm seeing. It's a pretty hefty article. Great job, lot's of great information!

Tone and balance:

The tone of your article is super neutral and simply just explanatory of this Seattle landmark. No tips on adjusting your tone, it sounds really good as is.

Sources and references:

I'm seeing four new sources from the original article to your sandbox draft. Great work adding those new sources. I know that that pier has been under a lot of work for a while so this is a great article to keep up to date and not misinform people with. Overall the sources are good, but consider searching for more sources not directly affiliated with the Seattle Aquarium to add some unbiased references.

Organization:

Your organization is very good. You've clearly identified your different categories you've added and bolded the titles which made it really pleasant to read and compartmentalize. Only tip I have is to consider making the "other exhibits" category its own section, making it a bolder title and paragraph of its own. Otherwise, amazing organization and very easy to read/know what I'm reading.

Images and media:

I definitely recommend adding some new media to this article. Consider replacing the current photo at the beginning of the article with a more up to date photo. I also think if you added some imagery of the pier construction it could help give a really nice visual to people of the construction that the aquarium is putting so much work into. Some new photos would look really nice in there.

Overall impression:

Overall, very well done. The length itself is great. It's not too long, not too short. Just consider updating the statistic, adding some imagery, and making the "other exhibits" its own section. Your amount of interesting information on the landmark is a great strength and with the minor suggestions I made, I think you have a really great article on your hands.