User:Julianpig15/Angel Martino/Mburg012 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Angel Martino


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Julianpig15/Angel_Martino?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


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

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.)

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

all of the information is relevant but maybe break it up a little so it isnt just solid paragraphs to read, makes finding the facts easier.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

the article seems to be fairly neutral with no mistakes of putting heavy bias in

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

i feel like just finishing up and adding some more information will make the page less underrepresented

Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

make sure to cite where the information is in the paragraphs, then they arent just chilling at the bottom

Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

the info will be supported reliably once the citations are put in

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?

just adding some info seems like all that is really needed the set up is going well so far