User:Anemic Walrus/User:Almondmilk2/Alaina Urquhart/Anemic Walrus Peer Review

General info
Curiouscat21
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Curiouscat21/Ayo Akingbade
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * N/A:

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The lead clearly describes what the rest of the article will talk about. Some wording could be improved, i.e. As Akingbade herself has acknowledged, she "addresses notions of urbanism, power and stance." could be changed to: Akingbade has stated that she "addresses notions of urbanism, power, and stance", or to a paraphrase of this sentiment.

Content

The content is strong, and discusses some of Wikipedia's equity gaps. The distinction between biography/career/filmography/awards is useful to break up the article into easily digestible chunks.

Tone and Balance, Sources/References

The article is mostly neutral, but seems to rely heavily on Q&A articles with the filmmaker. These Q&As are directly quoted or referred to frequently, which gives it more of an essay tone rather than an encyclopedic tone. Additionally, use of adjectives like "powerful commentary" demonstrate a bias towards the subject of the article. The links work and support the claims of the article. However, more neutral and notable sources could be used (reviews, magazine articles, available on the Macodrum library omni).

Organization

For the most part, the organization is good. In the filmography chart, it might be useful to use formatting that makes the "Yes" green and remove the "No", to make it more readable. In terms of grammar and readability, some things could be improved, such as changing "earnt" to "earned" (they are both grammatically correct but the latter is much more common) and splitting up some sentences to avoid run-ons.