User:GabrielleGutierrez/Buhen/Starkid25 Peer Review

General info
GabrielleGuiterrez
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:GabrielleGutierrez/Buhen
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Buhen

Evaluate the drafted changes
The Lead Section


 * 1) Lead is concise and provides additional information about the settlement.
 * 2) Adds some modern context about the settlement in the third paragraph, however is missing the citation/footnote of the preservation efforts mentioned that is in the original article.
 * 3) Could potentially reorganize the splitting of the paragraphs by merging 1 and 2 together for the purposes of reading flow.

Clarity of Article Structure


 * 1) Readability is good, cut down significantly on excessive incomplete sentences.
 * 2) Additions of both the Headquarters section and Exploring Copper Production provides additional context to the page.
 * 3) There are repeats between the Fortress and the Headquarters section that are remaining from the reorganizing of the end, might read better if one was removed from one section.
 * 4) Added section of the Buhen Horse has no lead-in throughout the article, would be beneficial for sourcing and flow if there is a precursor. Would help a lot in continued accessibility in reading flow.

Coverage Balance


 * 1) Each section is an appropriate length for the content written, the reorganization of the main article body allows for readers to get a better idea of the information provided.
 * 2) Article is very informative and not leading at all. There are no specific viewpoints covered and is very neutral in its presentation.
 * 3) There is conclusive angle within the article, it is entirely informative with additions placed for the purpose of providing further knowledge on specified topics of the page.

Content Neutrality


 * 1) The language of the article is very neutral and very informative for the purposes of educating, there is not one viewpoint presented over the other nor is there any missing.
 * 2) The information in the article focuses on providing more information about the settlement and important aspects of discoveries that are made within.
 * 3) Readability is good and allows for good flow within its paragraphs.

Sources


 * 1) There doesn't seem to be any more additional photos needed to be added to the article, author is correct in not adding more
 * 2) There's only one source for the Buhen horse section and the Headquarters section, would recommend that additional sources are provided. Would also recommend that the author find a more academic or historic source surrounding the Buhen horse article.
 * 3) Other new sources provided help to complement the preexisting ones.