User:The Chris Happy/Qualicum National Wildlife Area/Olipisacreta Peer Review

General info
The Chris Happy, 67773skies, FinnJackart
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:The Chris Happy/Qualicum National Wildlife Area
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Qualicum National Wildlife Area

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The lead is clear but it goes into the history of the park and its policies instead of providing a summary of the paragraphs below. The information in it is important to the article so maybe take the sentences in your intro and make it into a history paragraph. To improve your lead I would suggest explaining in the first sentence that this is a national park and then explaining in the next couple of sentences the general description of the location and summarize the information in the paragraphs below. The size of your lead does seem reasonable.

Content

The content of the paragraphs appears to be up to date and for the most part provides enough detail for each topic discussed. Both the invasive and endangered species section provide excellent summaries of the species that are discussed without going into intense detail. I would suggest re-reading each paragraph to ensure all the sentences are on topic (ex. the first sentence of the topography paragraph would be great in an intro for the whole article and the last sentence in the blue heron section doesn’t seem very relevant with the topic). I would also consider adding another species to the invasive species paragraph as the title is plural.

From what I've read it doesn't appear to me that you have included at least five topics from the assignment list. I only counted around 3ish. Something that stuck out to me that I think would be good to include and might help is an indigenous perspective ex. What territories does this park reside on?

Tone and Balance

Overall, your article appears neutral. I do feel that this article does solely focus on plant life and topography but using your intro for a history section and including an indigenous perspective like I mentioned earlier will provide more perspectives for the article.

Sources and References

Your sources look good. They appear to be up to date and you included sources that weren't just governments ones which help give a more well-rounded perspective and you used quite a bit of them. Overall solid job.

Organization

Overall the flow of your article is good. I do have a couple of suggestions that might improve it. I would suggest switching your species and topography articles so that all species related topics are together. My other suggestion is to restructure your species section. I would consider renaming it to plants or flora to make it clear that only plant species are being discussed or include some animals found in the park. I would also consider swapping the scientific names of each plant species listed to the common one if they have them. I think it'll make the section less difficult to read and saves the reader having to search up each species name if they are not familiar with the area.

Proofreading

Overall I didn't see too many typos. Like I mentioned above doing another reread to fix the wording of some of your sentences will make this article stronger (ex. for endangered species paragraph change ‘the great blue heron is endangered at the park’ to ‘is at risk for extirpation in the park’)

Overall impressions

I liked reading your article. Super interesting to learn about the complex and important ecosystems the park holds and the unique species that inhabit it. The Garry Oak ecosystem sounds really fascinating and it’s unfortunate that it's declining. Just some general restructuring and addition of details will improve the article a lot. Solid job and keep up the good work :).