User:Brtneynguyen/Security Alarm/NatalieV10 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Brtneynguyen


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Brtneynguyen/Security Alarm
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Security alarm

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead- The writer appears to make no changes with the lead. The lead itself is concise and gives a good overview of the article's content.

Content- The content is relevant to the article. Some information may not be up to date as some sources and further reading references are over 20 years old. You do well with giving each type of alarm an equal amount of representation.

Tone & Balance- The writing is very neutral and each section is well represented.

Sources & References- There is no work cited in your writing, nor a reference area. Your bibliography sandbox was also empty. Cite your sources so you don't in trouble. Some sources in the article also appear old and out of date.

Organization- The writing is clear and concise. There are clear paragraphs for each alarm system.

Images & Media- The writer doesn't share any images in the sandbox. Looking at what you have written and the article, you could add some photos since there are none in that area of the article.

Overall Impressions- The content you added looks good. Make sure to cite work and put them in the reference section. There are some grammar errors as well.

It looks like you copied and pasted the sections- microwave detection to motion sensors. Looking at the article and what you have written, almost everything is the same. For this article, is your purpose to edit grammar and sentence structure? It appears you have not added any content to the article sections.

Peer reviewed by Natalie V.