User:Egarciaart/User:Adgalvan1819/Jake Lee (artist)/Egarciaart Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Adgalvan1819


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Adgalvan1819/Jake Lee (artist)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * User:Adgalvan1819/Jake Lee (artist)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead: You are missing a 'Lead' It comes before the contents list. It is an opportunity for you to point out the main facts or parts you are writing about in your article. You cannot add anything under your Lead that is NOT covered in the article. It should have a sentence that focuses on introducing your article, think of it as a thesis or one sentence that describes your entire article.

Content: I would go back and look over the example or outline the professor provided on how to create our article rough draft. She talks about the sections we should include, and that there are one or two that we only add IF it applies to our artist. For example, I believe the 'Honors and Awards' section is not mandatory, unless our artist has received awards. If you can't find anything then you don't have to create a section for it. As for your overall content, it all relates to your artist. There is no unnecessary or irrelevant information. I would however try to add more information about their artwork. I know it is difficult to find things, but maybe some more details about the artwork. Like what type of landscape your artist paints, or does their art fall under a certain style like impressionism. I noticed that you mentioned his work revolves around a lot of landscape, but you did not mention that is also focuses on architecture.

Tone and Balance: The content you have added is neutral, which is great! It does not sound or feel like you have included your personal opinion or emotions. That being said, you do not sound biased, for, or against any of the information. I feel that the information under 'Exhibitions' may be a bit underrepresented. Maybe you can explain more on what the '12 piece' artwork was or looked like.

Sources and References: The reference you have for the sentence "He was also" is unclear to what it is supposed to be referencing to. The rest of the references match the information. Some of your sources are a bit old. They date back to 2002 and 2010. I myself don't understand what to do if we can't find something more recent, or even if we have to. One of the awesome things you have is that one of the sources is from an interview with the artist. The links work great.

Organization: The last sentence under the 'Bibliography' section is incomplete. The second sentence under section 'Education', "He was also" is incomplete. It feels cut off. The content is well-written. I could only find one other grammatical error. The sentence under section 'Education' that says "Los Angeles,California" there should be a space after the comma. It is very easy to read. The sections divided the content neatly.

Images and Media: There are no images in this article. Maybe you can find a photo of the artist.

For New Articles Only: I am pretty sure that our articles are considered as "new" So, I would say you are missing content under a few sections. I would add a bit more to the bibliography. Your article does follow the pattern and format of other Wikipedia articles. I am not sure if your article is linked to other articles, you can ask about that.

Overall Impressions: Well, I am impressed with the way you organized your draft. It seems like you have your sections and you know what you are going to write about. I would ask the professor if adding details is okay. For example, giving details about an artwork, going into a tiny formal analysis.