User:Calenjanesky/Bessie Brown Mention/Chloe McKeown Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Calenjanesky and Danifuchs


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Calenjanesky/Bessie Brown Mention


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

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.)

Initial Thoughts/Overall Impressions
First off, your article is succinct, well-organized, and conveys the information effectively. While the article is not long, it includes all the pertinent information that tells Bessie Brown Mention's story. Keep up the good work! Make sure you are keeping an eye on grammar/spelling (the nitty-gritty details). Try your best to link to other articles and possibly add images or media to make the article eye-catching.

Lead
I don't see a lead that introduces your figure. I recommend you add a sentence or two at the top of your page introducing Bessie Brown Mention and her role as a notable figure/feminist. A lead will help you introduce your focus and gives a brief statement on the individual and lets readers know why she matters.

Content
Your content is well-suited for Wikipedia. I like how direct it is in giving the facts while remaining impartial. I also noticed that you included lots of dates, which I found were really helpful creating a visual timeline of your individual's life. I think your information is solid and showcases an accurate evaluation of the her life. In terms of next steps, I recommend you ensure everything is spelt correctly and proper grammar is used. It can be distracting for the reader to see small errors as it diminishes the awesome work you've included. I also recommend you find other Wikipedia articles you could link to this one. This allows readers to explore multiple channels of information while reading your biography.

Tone and Balance
Your article has great balance! I found when reading it, none of the paragraphs felt bias or non-impartial. In terms of tone, I think it would be great to try to convey a professional tone. Throughout the article, there are some instances where you could be more sophisticated in how you describe the individual or the organizations they are associated with. I think this would make the article sound more impartial and direct!

Sources and References
In terms of sources and references, I only see two. I think it would be wise to diversify where your information is coming from rather than relying on only two. I think adding in more sources will help add credibility to the article as it will bolster/support the sources you already used.

The links work, which is great! Your article is also well-cited, having the citations at the end of many of your sentences.

Organization
I think the organization of the article is clear. I found each heading matched the content under it. Your article was easy to read and I appreciated how concise your writing was. Great job breaking down each section and writing detailed paragraphs that describe the information well.

Images and Media
You currently have no media included in your article. If possible, see if you can add images that are relevant to your article to make the page visually appealing and informative.

New Wiki Article Feedback
At the moment, the article is in compliance with Wikipedia's Notability requirements, which say the article must be supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources. Great work! Your article includes clear headings and the content is suited to each of the headings. Definitely work on linking to other articles to make it more discoverable.