User:Hquint8/User:Margaritaa3/Mary Morez/Hquint8 Peer Review

General info
Margaritaa3
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Mary Morez

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

The lead has been updated and is informative and clear. It is a brief summary of information included in the rest of the article. There is no need to add extra information in that section.

The content and sources are relevant to the artist. The layout of information is organized and the overall tone of the article is neutral. Artwork section could use adjusting words or sentences to make the sentences flow better.

Reference 3 seems like a reference to an artwork but I am confused how it is used in the article.

there are no images yet but I think it would be beneficial to add a couple images of the artworks mentioned. making sure to consider copyright etc.

The article uses a few secondary sources. Smithsonian collections are reliable sources. my overall impression of the article is a positive one. Seems like the article is almost done just needs an image or two and fine tuning the information and flow of the article