User:Hush Muninn/Khepri/EdieJones71 Peer Review

General info
Hush Munnin
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead: Clear and concise. Does not take too much away from the rest of the article and does not say too much that the other sections sound repetitive.

Clarity: Section structure flows well. Starting with etymology makes sense, and sets up the rest of the sections really well. Could appearance be included in the lead?

Coverage: Lots of well-articulated information. Makes the article feel very full and engaging. Could Khepri's role in the Amduat be a sub-section of religion? Could the word origin in the etymology section come before his appearance in Egyptian literature/stories?

Neutrality: No heavy-leaning messages. All the information remains neautral and unspeculating, and is sources quite neatly and appropriately.

Sources: Good amount of new sources included into the article. Well-balanced of citations and references to sources. Wide coverage of topics, none that point to being unnecssary/inaccurate.