User:Diligent Daisy/Video editing/1spidey3 Peer Review

General info
Diligent Daisy
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Diligent Daisy/Video editing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Video editing

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.)

There are some super solid edits made in this article. Starting off with leads section very strong with condensing information and taking away potential biases within the actual words of the section. Very pinpoint purposeful editing for the background section as well to condense the information to not seem repetitive and flow better than the previous information.

I think the sources added are very purposeful toward the article as a whole.

My critiques are limited and difficult to find. But looking at the article's error, it has to do with the context of the history in video editing with missing information. I noticed the background section touched on this but it is unclear to me if that is the missing information that it is flagging. Additionally I am looking at only one sandbox so other group members could've touched on the flagged messaged for the article.