User:Inmh/House of Romanov/HIS346 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Inmh


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


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * House of Romanov

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.)

Lead: Lead for this article is rather concise, author may want to add an additional sentence to two sentences adding more information regarding the article's main sections. A simple sentence adding information about the family's execution, the Tsar's remains, and contemporary claims would be all encompassing.

Content: The content added is extremely relevant to the topic, and the author did a great job finding information about the Romanovs that would be beneficial to the original page. The content added seems to be up to date, given the latest information about the Romanovs' remains as well as contemporary claims is from over 20 years ago. The overall tone of the content added is natural, but may need to be slightly more formal in how experts are referred to, and certain phrases need to be clarified. More specifically, the names of the archeologists and other scientists involved in the discovering of the remains. The content does not try to persuade the reader, but relay information.

Sources and References: The references seem to back up the information in the article well. There are more website article sources The sources are both thorough and recent. The links provided work, but the last two references listed on the page need to be properly rewritten. The article is lacking sources for the Contemporary Romanovs section, but the author seems aware.

Organization: The content seems well organized, however it is unclear how the new content will be organized with regard to the information already existing on the page. The headings are clear, and the content reflects the heading.

Overall quality: The overall quality of the content is good. The page does not seem finished, as the author has written "citation needed" in areas that do need citations and source references. More information could be added to the section regarding Contemporary Romanovs, but other sections seem complete.