User:WikiCardy223/The Florida Wildlife Corridor/Madhatter1752 Peer Review

General info
WikiCardy223
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:WikiCardy223/The Florida Wildlife Corridor :
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * The Florida Wildlife Corridor

Lead

 * updated to reflect the new content added
 * includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic
 * includes a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * includes information that is present in the article
 * concise

Content

 * content added is relevant to the topic
 * the reviewed content added is up to date
 * no content appears to be missing. Placement is appropriate and quality information is used to elaborate on some topics

Tone and Balance

 * content added is neutral
 * No claims appear heavily biased toward a particular position
 * No viewpoints seem to be overrepresented, or underrepresented. Good quality of of presentation
 * doesn't seem to have a persuasive pull. achievement of an Informative article

Sources and References

 * new content backed is up by a reliable secondary source of information
 * content accurately reflect what the cited sources say
 * sources reflect the available literature on the topic
 * majority of sources current
 * sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors and include historically marginalized individuals where possible
 * links accurately work
 * some links lack detail (date/title etc. potential improvement can be added to these articles to support reliability)

Organization

 * content is concise, clear, and easy to read
 * no apparent grammatical errors
 * content added is well-organized and broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic

Images and Media

 * no images and media were presented on this article
 * links to youtube were provided under expeditions and documentary films however there is a lack in provided links. (Not necessary potentially suggested tags)

Overall impressions

 * content added improved the overall quality of the article and presents the article as more complete
 * strengths of the content added is that it adds appropriate and relevant information that is needed for a full description of the topic assigned. Current information about the topic was well structured as well as background information to provide the reader more about its origin and goals. although it has no images, the structure of the article is appealing to the reader and well organized making it easy to read while staying insightful.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * improvement of link details on just a few of the added links can increase reliability as well as provided links for films mentioned as a way for the reader to access easier in case of interest.
 * citations in the About section to show where information came from as well as goals section