User:BruinsHockey1234/Amazon Web Services/4realtraveler Peer Review

General info
BruinsHockey1234
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The article that I am evaluating is the Amazon Web Services draft. First and foremost, the layout and the structure is easy to read and not complicated which makes the article look neater. Next, the draft is relevant to the Amazon Web Services because it starts off talking about the CEO of Amazon--Adam Selipsky--and how climate change has been impacted by Amazon Web Services.

The next thing that was reviewed was the neutrality of the article. Each Wikipedia article needs a level of neutrality with no biases toward one side or the other. After reading the draft, there is a little to no biases throughout the article. It is extremely fact based. However, the article is focused mainly how the AWS platform is benefiting the environment, but the article would benefit from the other side of the argument. Are there, if any, arguments against AWS and their platform benefiting climate change? It would be interesting to see the other side and what the negative impacts have on climate change.

Next, the references cited are correctly cited however they are not currently working and do not link to the source directly so it would be beneficial to edit the link so that it is easy to click on. Furthermore, the links are reliable to the information in the draft. After researching the source it seems to be appropriate, however the article would potentially benefit from another source to back up the information. Other than an additional source, there are no more critiques for the article draft and its references.