User:280282colum/Throwaway Kids/XPatK Peer Review

General info
280282colum
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:280282colum/Throwaway Kids:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Throwaway Kids

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

The new information provided by the person I am reviewing is in regards to updating the sources to contain more up to date information about the general concept that is being described by the original page.

All changes appear to be quite clear cut and neutral in tone.

A single instance of worry is that it remains a bit unclear whether the information is word for word or a personal rephrasing as some of the provided new sources dont have a link to see or are blocked behind a certain lock (be it account base [first link] or in the case of the third link- not existing except in archive form which Is considered acceptable).

Please double check sources to ensure working sources but the average content appears to be Malleable enough to portray originality as well as purposeful use for the original article to expand it.