User:Hazelsvest/The Trojan Women/Cthetree Peer Review

General info
Hazelsvest
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hazelsvest/The_Trojan_Women
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trojan_Women
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trojan_Women

Evaluate the drafted changes
Review by Cthetree:

Lead

The lead gives a good overview of the topic and relating tangents that reflects the most important information in the article. I am unsure if the lead gives more weight to certain sections than others because the lead is where the most information on the topic is found in the draft. I think there are a few tangents in the lead that could be cut or expanded on in other sections of the article. I agree with the assessment that the sentence in the lead about 415BC is not super relevant to the topic.

Content

The current sections are well organized to reflect the article. I think the organization of absent sections that are in the original are in a sensible order and I agree that Themes and Significance should go after Plot.

Tone/balance

Keeping the original article in mind I think the sections are equal in importance and that the sections stay on topic. There are no viewpoints left out or missing in the article and I think the overall balance of the article is good. In the Themes and Significance section there is a slight sway towards a viewpoint that I would keep in mind, but otherwise there are no attempts to convince the reader.

Organization

The overall article is clear and easy to read. It has no gramatical errors and breaks down the content well.

Neutrality

I think the article as a whole is neutral. However I would watch out for any claims that insinuate one idea or another about the purpose of the play. The article does not make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or past historians. I think the article paints the topic in a a clear way that reflects its importance and general information.

Media

I agree that article could use more images, and I like the idea of finding more for the modern adaptations section

Sources

There are a variety of sources are up-to-date and reliable. Could there be more citations added to the Themes and Significance section?

Original Article Observations

The Plot section in the original could use more wiki links to other articles, specifically I am thinking of Agamemnon. I agree with the previous editors that the Modern adaptations section needs more citations. I’m not sure if the plot section also needs citations because it is a summary of the play itself.