User:Briannastjean/Theory of Hyper(in)visibility/Malexakiss Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) Briannastjean, MeaganLukavec, Martiniaudrey, Gabspedraza, Lizzo2210, RamirezAlejandro305


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Briannastjean/Theory_of_Hyper%28in%29visibility?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template

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.)

The Sandbox contents are all relevant to the topic of the article, there isn't anything distracting. The article seems to be neutral and free of claims/frames with heavy biases towards any particular position. The viewpoints seem to be balanced with no overrepresentation or underrepresentation. The links work for most of the citations, however there is one citation that appears to not have been cited using the citation tool. It looks like regular text and the link does not work, that will need to be fixed before it's added to the article. The sources that are available to be clicked on are all supportive of the claims within the article. Each fact is supported by reliable references and the information all comes from the sources provided. The sources are neutral journals from the UCF library is what it appears like. The information is in date and the only thing missing is that one source's correct formatting.