User:CoolQuokka/Naqada culture/Lellenkarsen Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

Overall I think that your edits to the page are great, and you have a well balanced article. For the lead, have you considered introducing the three phases of Naqada culture? Perhaps it would prime your reader for the rest of the article. On another note, it could be good to mention biological studies in the lead as well. Could be cool for lead to work as a preamble to the article.

Clarity of Structure

Your clarity of structure is good, and it works for what you are doing. The article focuses on the crucial topics: excavation, remains, biological studies, etc. Chronologically is always an option, but I think that this style is also functional.

Coverage Balance

The section length is good. I like that you added more to models and excavations, it was short before, but now it fits in with the other articles, and the representation equals the importance. The article doesn't feel like it is trying to convince anyone of anything, which is good. The reader is just provided with the information.

Content Neutrality

Your article reads very neutrally, it is hard to distinguish any bias. There are no claims on other peoples' part, that are unnamed. It does not feel like you are emphasizing the good side of the topic or a bad side, you just present information in a way that allows the reader to achieve their own opinion.

Sources

Your Journal of Egyptian Archaeology reference looks good, and the page doesn't seem to have any very repetitive sources. I was curious about World Cat. It seems to be a database. Are you able to reference information directly from the source instead of the database?