User:Akcarter/Lovea/Mads1978 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Akcarter


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Akcarter/Lovea


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * None

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.)

This is a great beginning to an article. The lead is very clear about the site and its significance, and provides a good introduction. There are clear headers that make the article really easy to read and also interesting to read. The headers also give information about where the author is going to add more information. There are great details about the site itself, as well, about what is found there, the burials, and why the site is significant. There are clear references that seem to be efficiently placed and up to date regarding the excavations that have occurred there. The tone of the writing is unbiased and seems neutral, but there is a quotation in one part that I am not quite sure about. I know that we are allowed to have quotations but it might be more effective to alter the words to ensure absolutely no plagiarism. The pictures added as well really help establish where the site is and give an example of the habitation that is discussed in the article, providing a great visible reference. There is room for improvement and additions to information, but that comes with time as well.