User:Alexcombs5/She's the Man/Isabella.mitrow Peer Review

The lead has been updated to reflect the new content added by my peer. It is short and concise and includes a solid introductory sentence that describes what She's the Man is all about. Overall there Is not too much to say about the lead it is short and to the point, it does not get into the articles main sections, but I think that would be self explanatory and repetitive considering the headings are a tell tale sign of exactly what is to come.

Yes, all of the content added to this wikipedia page is relevant to the topic being it is all on the film. All of the content is also up to date and refers back to the regional release date of the film. In the article body they give a brief secretion of the background and what is to come in the rest of the paper. All the content necessary in describing the overall plot of the film is in the article body and tells you exactly what you need to know about the film. They are not giving too much information where the movie is completely spoiled but giving just enough so again the person reading the article knows the overall theme.

The content added is definitely neutral, not giving any bias information or claiming this is the best film and you must watch it now. Rather, the article simply tells the reader the overall plot and theme of this romantic comedy. Guiding the readers interest in the film. On top of this it is written in a neutral tone proving the proper information to persuade the reader and have their interests spiked regarding the film itself. I think it is hard to actually persuade the reader of one side considering this article body is just a summary of the film. The tone throughout the article is again neutral.

The references provided are very applicable and necessary in order to provide the proper and correct information. There are two sources listed. Both sources are current and easily accessible to click on in order to check if they are good articles.

Overall, this wikipedia page is very well done. I feel it provided me with all the necessary information and also had all the correct citations to prove that. There are no grammatical errors nor spelling errors.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

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.)