User:BoyaJia666/Bad habit/Anonyme1604 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Boyajia666)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_habit?action=edit


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Still under construction

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.)

Intro Section:

- The different sections presented on the page seem to grasp an effective and efficient material of the main concept, However I do find it lacks unique elements to the material. It's still in the writing stages, however I do hope to see the texts expands on the main ideas and provide examples such as different studies around the world done on 'Bad habits'. This is a minor suggestion my peer could consider when finalizing the edits.

- The first section (Development) includes an introductory sentence pointing out the major points about the article. However, it does come across as being brief on the expansion of these major points. As stated above, it could benefit from adding more information. It would be favourable to make that a a main focus during the editing process; considering the fact that the introduction should always captture a consice and descriptive idea.

Content:

- I would say the included content is relevant to the vague category of the topic which is 'bad haits'. There are many sections, involving the development, will and intention, prevention, cure, and christian perspective. These concepts work together to produce a well established These themes encompass the overarching theme of "art" in all major senses of the term.

Sources and References:

- There are references and they are referenced. Has an extensive reference section that involves varying secondary sources.

- It is clear that the written articles include what the sources are arguing or stating.

- Some sources are current others outdated,

- There is a diverse amount of authors included in the references. Reliable sources.

- Much are from academic journals, such as JSTOR. Pushing narrative that information could be reliable.

- The links work

Organization:

- There has yet to be any additions made to the chosen article. The talk page has no edits or discussion of edits by my peer.

- Did not detect any grammatical errors. However, this is still in the beginning stages.

Images and Media:

- Used media that is relevant to the main idea.

Conclusion:

- There are a couple of different aspect throughout the artcl that me peer could modify and insert to improve the final copy. The Development part can benefit from adding examples of studies done around the world on the study of bad hait, as well as adding other religions instead of solley focusing on Christianity. The rest of the section could additionally expand on the idea, other that that my peer did a gclean draft, once strengthened, it will be phenomenal.