User:Tardis420/Serpentine Wildlife Management Area/Caitking Peer Review

General info
Tardis420, Ardenenglish1, JHK34, Lisolemon
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Tardis420/Serpentine Wildlife Management Area - Wikipedia:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Serpentine Wildlife Management Area - Wikipedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead:

The article is missing a lead. You could draft one or use the one that is already in the active Wikipedia article, maybe adding some more information. For example, you could expand on things like the size of the management area or its establishment with the existing lead.

Content:

The content of the article does a really good at addressing different perspectives. For example, the first section about Indigenous involvement in the site discusses nearby reserves, acknowledges the land on which the site is located, and discusses Indigenous involvement with the site. One thing that could be expanded on for clarity is in the last phrase of that section, where it says, "in collaboration with Indigenous voices". You could specify who the Indigenous voices are that collaborate to create conservation plans. That way, the information is a bit more specific and meaningful to the reader. That would also give more autonomy and emphasis on the Indigenous people involved, rather than just lumping them into a broad category. Other than that, the content and sources used appear to be up to date, and you have included at least 5 of the topics listed on the rubric.

Tone and Balance:

The article appears to be written in a neutral tone, presenting factual information about the site and avoiding any biased claims or topics. You do a great job at providing a comprehensive overview of the management site.

Sources and References:

The reference list is properly formatted and all hyperlinks work. You used a large variety of sources which helped you cover so many subjects in the article. You pull from a variety of sources including government and Indigenous.

Organization:

Overall, the article is well-written, easy to understand, and concise. My only feedback is that the section about the impact of climate change on the management area could be expanded upon to give the reader more information. For example, you could give more information about the impacts of extreme weather and rising sea level in the area. You could include a forecast for the area regarding projected sea-level rise in the next decade, or you could mention recent notable extreme weather events in the area. Also, the Species at Risk section has a few long run-on sentences which could be edited down to become more concise. Also, for article formatting, you can change the subject titles to be headings instead of just bold text. This way, they will appear the same way that the "article draft" text appears, which is how Wikipedia articles are usually formatted. Overall, you guys did a great job with your article.

Images and Media:

You could add an image to represent the article, but I don't think it's necessary for this assignment.