User:Acuna1316/Jaafar Jotheri/Nautika.richards Peer Review

Evaluate the drafted changes
Pros:


 * The article lead is clear and concise. It is obvious who the article is supposed to be about and there is a nice bit of information on who he is. Not enough, but it is a good start, and is decent enough for the lead as it is just supposed to be a summary.
 * None of the information is biased, and there is not any information not related to the individual.
 * The inclusions of publications is a nice touch, that way the reader can gather more information on that topic or even on the individual possibly if he wanted to. There's only two publications written down, and you said there was at least twenty, so I am assuming it's just not finished. These might be sources, so I would consider that for a bibliography, unless it's supposed to be separate? Maybe ask Howland if this confuses you? I am obviously not an expert.

Cons:


 * It would be nice to be more aware of the work he is actually doing. I don't know what you are planning for this article, as it is not clear currently, as there not any headings or anything, but I think delving deeper into some of the more popular publications he is doing in a separate section would be helpful. Yes we know what work he does, but the beginning only discusses the surface of what he does, and in the long run that is not very helpful. I don't know maybe you were already planning on doing this, but I thought I would at least suggest it, as someone who is the reader.
 * It would be nice to know where the sources are from, like in a bibliography. Yes there is a reference list, but a bibliography might be less complicated and more easier to look at if someone were to want to find the sources for the individual. It might not be necessary for yours if you only have a few sources, but it is just something I as a reader would personally prefer, and something others might prefer. Especially if you are writing more and are planning on making more references.
 * I really don't have anything else to say, as there is not a lot here currently. Because of that I am just going to say, there needs to be more information in my opinion. You may just not have included everything yet, but if not and this is all you have I recommend looking back to the first con.