User talk:ChaseGG/sandbox

Brody Scott Peer Review
Overall I think the article is very well structured and the information added is sufficient for the topic. I really like the combination of the headings, it makes it look much cleaner!

'''On the intro line I would maybe start with "Making Treaty 7 is...." and use the [[ to link it to your site.'''

Phoenix Spearchief Peer Review
Along with Brody, the article is very well written and extremely clean to navigate through. The names of the Indigenous communities are very well stated and accurate. "Kainaiwa" is more of a formality, but personally I'd put "Kainai" in place of it. Don't have to, just a suggestion! But looks great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenix.K1918 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? -Yes everything is relevant and detailed. Nothing distracted me. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? -The article is very neutral and there seems to be no instances of bias. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? -No viewpoints are under or overrepresented in any way, shape or form. Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? -Checked all of the links and they all open and link to the information cited. Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? -Everything is cited properly within the article. One of the sources comes directly from the creators of Making Treaty 7, so there could be a slight possibility of bias in this link. Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? -All information is current and up to date. There are new Wikipedia pages that can be created which is awesome!