User:Trentjohnson17/Water security/ShawnInnocent99 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Lead
Lead has not been updated since adding to an already existing article. New sections begin with a good hook which draws in audience and sets up the article.

Content
Fantastic detailing, good flow to all the new information added as well. The new section provides in depth detail on the Chinese water situation and the steps they're taking to counter that. New content added is relevant and up to date. It also has a good range from its current issues to its plans to negate those issues and how those plans are received internationally.

Tone and Balance
Article presents an impartial view. Information added is factual and is not leaning towards any opinions.

Organization
Most sentences are concise informative and can be stand alone sentences. The paragraphs start broadly and then focus on the main point as the paragraph goes on. Sentences are grammatically correct and free of spelling errors.

Overall impression
New information added is fantastic in terms of depth and range. Not a criticism but more a question is why is there a huge chunk of information that already exists in the article pasted in your sandbox because it doesn't seem like there is any new information added to those sections.