 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Peer review
General info
Whose work are you reviewing? S.tahl93
Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:S.tahl93/sandbox
A nice lead to outline what the article is about, briefly describing the major sections discussed.
The content is relevant and up to date. There are reliable sources. The tone is very informative and neutral, outlining aspects of the OAEC as well as the current projects in place.
The sources are reliable and credible. The links are functioning. I appreciate the date that you sourced the information.
The content is well written, concise and easy to follow. It is informative and thorough.
Do you plan on adding images? I think it would add to the article!
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media
Is this intended to be its own article, or are you adding to an existing one? I get the impression that it is its own article.
Overall, this is great! I don't have much feedback because it feels well rounded and it seems like you've really executed what you're intending to inform people about.
Geoffrey Luoma (talk) 03:22, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Geoff
Thank You Geoffrey for peer-reviewing. I might add images just to show what the Center looks like to get an overall picture of how big it actually is. This is a new article so adding a few more things is probably a really good idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.tahl93 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)