User:Ethan4757/Frank Braxton/GraceRequejo Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Ethan4757


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ethan4757/Frank_Braxton?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Frank Braxton

Evaluate the drafted changes
LEAD

Your lead section is much more wholistic and tells the reader more specifically why Braxton is a significant designer. I would keep the part about him being a 'pioneering' African-American animator and director since he's such an important figure in animation history. Maybe instead of/in addition to the years he was active, you can say what he is best known for? Maybe mentioning that he animated comedy shorts during the golden age of American animation. (if you feel that relates enough to the body paragraphs) Overall your lead is informational and concise.

CONTENT

The content you added is pretty relevant, but honestly there are a lot of inaccuracies. First of all, his first job was not with Disney, but with Warner Bros. The part about him getting picked up by Ben Washam at LA City College is somewhat accurate, (although they didn't exactly meet at a singing class---Braxton met voice teacher Lee Wintner, who introduced him to Washam who was taking voice lessons at the time) but you should note that Washam recommended him to Warner Studio. I would take out the part about Washam creating a rumor that Warner Bros was racist because a) I can't find any accounts of this, and b) there would be no way to fact check this story. You should keep this clause from the original article: "With no prior animation experience Braxton was brought on as an "inbetweener" with one or two other new hires, but his talent propelled him to being an assistant animator to animator Ben Washam, in the Chuck Jones unit at Warner's. Thus many of the Chuck Jones cartoons of the mid-1950s contain Braxton's work." (you don't need to reword sentences that are already in the article unless they are wonky/inaccurate). Also he only worked at Disney for 10 days, not a few months. You don't really need to add the part about Disney trainees not completing their trainee period (seems a little irrelevant) After he was hired by Abe Levitow, then Bill Hurtz. You should include the exact date (1964) that he moved to Spain to work as an animator and director of Estudios Moros, as well as a list of the animations he worked on during his freelancing period in 1965.

TONE AND BALANCE

I would go over the article another time to check to make sure everything is completely neutral and based in fact. Most of the article appears to be in a neutral tone, but some parts read more like a story and less like a factual account of someone's career.

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

I think you need to evaluate your sources and see if you can find more that back up certain claims. I know it's hard to find information on obscure animation history, but maybe checking eulogies/more articles could help to strengthen your content. You should find a source that backs up the account of how his career got started, and fact check his time spent at Disney. You could also use animation credits as a source to accurately list what animations he has worked on.

ORGANIZATION

Some parts of the article were a little difficult to read and not totally grammatically correct. Work on making your sentences more concise, and checking to make sure it is all in the right tense. For example the sentence "As a senior at Manual Arts High School, he filled the 1947 yearbook with his depicting of school life," can be changed to "As a senior at Manual Arts High School, he filled his 1947 yearbook with drawings of school life." In terms of the actual organization, maybe it would help to have a section for Early Life, followed by Career, and Legacy. It would also help to include dates so that there is a more accurate timeline of when events occurred.

OVERALL IMPRESSIONYour article is definitely an improvement from the original, which had very little information and wasn't well organized. I think you contributed a good amount of information and your lead section is strong, it's just a matter of fixing some technical issues with your sentences and making sure all the information is accurate.