User:Brianna Fleshman/Kiyoshi Shiga/Cameronobr1 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Brianna Fleshman


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Brianna Fleshman/Kiyoshi Shiga


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Kiyoshi Shiga

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.)

Lead:

The lead section is short and sweet. It keeps a neutral tone, while also introducing the key aspects dealt with throughout the article. I might say it is a little too short and concise, it might not be the worst idea to expand on it a little more in order to provide a little more background. The lead paragraph has only relevant information to the passage which is a nice touch, in my opinion it could be expanded a little bit.

Content:

The content provided is very relevant to the topic. Every topic mentioned in the lead has a corresponding section down below which I found as a super strong point for this article. The content is up to date and does do its job to inform the writer. I do not think this article would be affected by content gaps much, mainly because the man who is the topic of this paper was in the majority of his country.

Tone and Balance:

The tone is extremely neutral, no viewpoints are pushed on the reader, it all flows very nicely. The information has no effect on the narrative of the article, it keeps it neutral.

Source and References:

The only potential issue I see with sources and references in this paper is the lack of citations. Specifically in the last major sections there are a couple of claims that I believe came from one of your sources, I think in order for it to be used in if paraphrased it needs to be cited so I would just check and make sure about that. Other than that the sources you chose were terrific, and you created a great balance in the sources you chose and taking them and making them your own words.

Organization:

Yes, the content added is all great actually. The content you have added is not only more exhaustive than the original article, but also adds more aspects of life to the subject in the article and brings them to life.

Images:

There is no image added at the moment, I think that is mainly due to the fact the original post already has an imagine, and a pretty nice one at that.

Overall Impression:

I actually really enjoyed reading your article and I wish I had more to say about it. I would say most importantly make sure to properly cite where you got claims at and maybe try to lengthen the lead section. I think if you accomplish these two things your article will be in very good shape.