User:Cbetters23/User:Cbetters23/sandbox/Niahsymone05 Peer Review

General info
Cbetters23
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Cbetters23/sandbox - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Artificial intelligence - Wikipedia

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.)

Peer review Lead In:

The article is filled with a lot of sources about this topic. It is hard to read because it isn't any paragraphs. I would suggest on making the article better by taking some resources out because having a lot of resources is very overwhelming and a lot of work (I know this from experience!), the less resources you use would be easier to read and write down.

Article Lead Section:

I feel satisfied with what the topic is about, he has sentence to match the resources that he put in the article and reflects on important information. The article gives a good amount of information and isn't redundant.

Structure:

The structure of the article is good, the sections are in a good order. There is nothing that is unnecessary or off topic. It reflects on a perspective that he had got from the sources, there are no significant viewpoints that are missing. The article does not persuade the reader to a one point of view. ￼

Neutral Content:

I could guess that the author is giving from the sources point of view trying to make it neutral. There are no words that doesn't feel neutral, doesn't make claims on unnamed groups. It focuses on the positive side of artificial intelligent.

Reliable Sources:

The sources are reliable, and the sentences makes sense to the cited sources. He got most of his sources from self-publish authors and blogs. There are not that many statements to each resource, so each statement is not off topic or anything. There are no unsourced statements in the article, and some are easy to find, and some are not easy to find. ￼

Reviewer Reflection:

I plan one taking some resources out of my article, making paragraphs for an easier read, and have easy access to my sources.