User:Jnnynguyen/So Much Blue/Teddymolineaux Peer Review

General info
Jnnynguyen
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jnnynguyen/So_Much_Blue?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=So_Much_Blue&diff=1187651527&oldid=1187639049
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=So_Much_Blue&diff=1187651527&oldid=1187639049

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 to your article is strong and informative, yet compact enough that it doesn't bog the reader down - I would keep it a similar size if not leave it be altogether. However, maybe consider addressing the author by his last name rather than his first name when mentioning him by only one name. The introduction sentence clearly introduces the topic and it is obvious what this article will be about. It seems as though the summary was already there for the most part, however the changes you made and the edits provided enhance the professionalism of the article and are more correct in a grammar sense, so good job. I would consider combining some of the sentences/sections that are shorter (e.g., 2-4 per say) so that they are less divided and the topics can be grouped together in a better way. Also, doing this allows you to perhaps add a few extra sentences or so to really give the reader/viewer a strong idea and summary of So Much Blue. The character list you added is very effective as it lists the characters one by one, and the descriptions of each are not too long. I feel it is better to do it how you did, with only 1 or 2 sentences per character to give the reader only a slight idea of them without revealing every single fact that the novel gives you. The tone and balance of your article are in good shape as they do not seem biased or favored towards one opinion but rather they are speaking neutrally and present facts rather than opinions. In your info box, it is important that the facts are correct so good job with deleting some unnecessary or even incorrect information and providing the correct information regarding the genre and the page count. With your sources, it is always important to provide which sources you have used so it is good that you added a source to the references list.

I believe the organization of this article is in the right format, providing the lead first followed by the summary, character list, and reception. It is important that the reader knows what happens in the book and the characters come after that. However, I would suggest you elaborate more on your Reception section - while you have quotes from different sources of how they received the article, it may be more effective if you speak on these opinions more and talk about how that impacts the book itself and the audience around it. Overall, the content you have added yourself is helpful to the article because it provides a whole new set of information that is necessary for the reader to understand and allows them to be more knowledgable in regards to the plot and the people.