User talk:Masterrrd/sandbox

Peer Review of Draft By User:Unbelizable101
Question #2: After reviewing the article I found that there were no APA citations included. There was only one section and It appeared to me that the user did not fill the requirements of the assignment. The Draft was not 800 words. It also didn't contain any internal links, inline citations, or sources for that matter. However, there were breaks between paragraphs. Wikipedia coding was not up to standards. Also, it was kind of hard to understand in the beginning because of grammar errors.

Question #3: When reviewing this article for neutrality and sources I found a few problems. In terms of sources, there were none stated. This could mean a lot of things. Either the author did not know how to source his references using wikipedia or the author didn't have any reliable sources. This could leave a person truly concerned and wondering if the information that they are reading is truly correct or comes from a bias view. However, it is to my belief that the author is writing from a neutral point of view. On the other hand, what exactly are to cons to artificial reefs. In my opinion, the author only talked about the pros.