User:Thouston7/Mason Temple/AmarraD. Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Thouston7


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Thouston7/new sandbox


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Mason Temple

Evaluate the drafted changes
It seems like for this draft the lead has been completely left out of the article. There is a lead in the original article of which encompasses all the information even within the draft. There is something however that concerns me in regards to the draft versus the original. It appears to me that the draft and the original are significantly similar, too similar. Now unless the work done in the draft has been moved to the original article already I’d say there is a bit of a problem. The only major changes I can find (and I don’t mean this in a harsh way) in this draft from the original article are the grammar and spelling errors. The structure is the same and the sentences seem and feel the same. I genuinely cannot see the difference and I’ve read them both over twice. There is no recent news, you're stating facts that have existed for decades. The information you have in the draft is in fact neutral from what I can tell. You have enough sources for the small amount of information provided. I feel like there’s a lot of untapped potential here. There is so much in these articles that you’ve linked, but I feel like the article draft is an oversimplification. Some of the sentences feel clunky like the sentence about how the church had the largest building in the US upon opening.

Now, if you have moved your work to the original article then that is a slightly different story in regards to your lack of changes. It is a good start but there is a lot more information you could provide. Such as the church’s events, how they’ve helped their community, any newspaper articles about their activities, their social/ religious structure within the congregation, do they have ministries and or church only holidays, who were important members back then, and who is important now? All of these are options for more information to add to the article. You should also make sure, just as I have recently learned, that the information you provide should be put in order of importance both overall and in each section. There were no photos added but the ones within the original article were sufficient enough at telling the story. Overall, I feel like this is very incomplete whether you already moved your work or if you didn’t and your draft looks the same as the original. It needs a lot of work, more information, and more topics. There’s so much more to every church than its history and construction.