User:Jasminbarrozo/Livermore, California/NativeBear4 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Jasminbarrozo)


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
(The lead in your sandbox was clearer, more precise. Description of article topic have a more concise picture in the description. The conciseness had a more neutral tone to it. A good overview of the major sections along with good hyper linking to information not in the article. Removing the repetitious sentence would enhance the lead even more

The added content maintained its neutrality well. Contents were very relevant to the topic and unbiased toward any position. No overripresentation or underrepresentation noted. Found the contents very informative without any persuasiveness.

New contents were very well backed up and actively reflect what cited sources say. Available literature is well reflected also. They are current. Written by many diverse authors and some were historically marginalized. )

Found the enhancements to be clearer, more precise and concise. They were written well without grammatical or spelling errors. Enjoyed reading the enhanced article.

~NativeBear4~