User:EmmaForRome142497/Prostitution in ancient Rome/AbbSe37 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * EmmaForRome142497
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:EmmaForRome142497/sandbox

Lead
The lead has yet to be updated by my peer. There is one sentence included about the price of a prostitute, which I assume will appear on the lead.

Content
The content is relevant to the topic, and I am assuming it is up to date. At this point, the content seems to touch on several aspects of prostitution in Ancient Rome, which is good, while not going into detail on things that are not relevant.

Tone and Balance
The tone appears to be neutral, not disparaging towards sex-work, which would be the thing to watch out for. It appears to be unbiased. I would look out for language, and whether or not to use terms such as "sex slaves", "pimps", and "prostitutes". Knowing when to use these words, or better words is important, because with a subject such as this the labels used will be loaded with assumptions, and so it would be important to use appropriate language. Language can also be more professional and less wordy.

Sources and References
Not all content is backed up by any source. the sources are current and look reliable. The in-text citations are not done properly, which is something to fix. There are no links to click on.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
Content does not appear to be disorganized. User's sections are there, and correspond to that of the original page. There are some spelling errors. Peer uses "CE" instead of BCE etc. Aside from that, and being conscious of word choice, there is no other comment to make.

Images and media evaluation
There are no Images to evaluate, or other types of media.

Overall evaluation
The content has improved the quality of the article. It fleshes out topics that are already present. The strengths are that it is vast, and broadens the topic more. What can be improved is the language, and the relevancy to some of the information provided.