User:Jramo059/Shanidar Cave/Emilie.meza Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Jramo059


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jramo059/Shanidar_Cave?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Shanidar Cave

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.)

Overall, there is a lot of relevant information that has been added. It has been broken up into good sized sections with no grammatical errors. If there is more information out there, it could be added to the last two section that were not in the original article. Good job :)

Lead

There is a lot of content added that was not in the previous article and more information added to thew new sections. There is no topic sentence because it is still being edited but the paragraph after is very well written.

Content

The information is relevant to the topic and the sources show that the information is relatively recent. They have added two new sections that had relevant information.

Tone and Balance

The tone is mostly neutral. There are some instance where it can seem like the author is swaying towards one way or another but after reading the entire section its clear that they just added those words to be concise. "Erik Trinkaus suggested that Shanidar 5 had its cranium deformed intentionally as an infant. However, this implication was overruled due to the fact that the curve was missing after the correction of a misplaced cranium bone fragment. Still, the frontal mid sagittal angle of this individual was very flat at 147." To me it sounds like they are trying to be convincing with the use of "however" and "still."

Sources and References

The sources are relatively current. The oldest one I see is from 1997, which isn't that bad and they have also included sources from more up-to-date years.

Organization

There are no grammatical or spelling errors that I can see and the content is broken up into good sized sections.

Images and Media

No images or media added.