User:Bellat123/Black Axe (organized crime group)/Jonas-heegaard Peer Review

General info
(Bella Thier)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The table of contents has some good additions and changes and I think it expands well considering the original articles lack of depth. However, I think it wouldn't hurt to add another section with case studies to provide some examples rather than meshing them into the other sections. It would be a simple but effective and clear addition to the page. Moreover, I think the chronology of the headings could change just to appeal more to what wiki users are looking for. People doing a wiki search are probably most concerned with the black axe hammers crime as that is the most notable aspect of their group and probably where the most important information about them is located. Thus, I would put crime first or second but certainly ahead of ideology as although ideology is an important component of the black axe hammer group, I think the main thing people will be lookin for is their crime. I also liked earlier how we talked about incorporating images or tables with data. It is something the current article lacks and is a good way to add easy, simple images and understanding for the reader.

Peer Review 2
For the intro, I would change the wording of the first sentence, its a little confusing, but first I'd just put a heading for it like "Who are they?" or something along those lines to make it more clear. Other than that, I think you kept relevant information in and the link to the most notable murder is a good idea as that captivates attention. For the broader writing picture, I think it's good, you point to important information, just needs to check punctuation at some points, and it could be more direct. I think it's really important in a wiki page to get the points across quickly as that's the nature of the information of a wikipedia page, however, it would be worth checking with the professor first. I like the TOC, although the same suggestions I offered in the first peer review are still up to you. I think the addition of the picture was a good addition to the page, it gives people an idea of what they're looking at without getting into the more gruesome details of their organization.