User:KFluh/Solar eclipse of May 29, 1919/Mkf093 Peer Review

General info
I an reviewing KFluh's article.
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:KFluh/Solar eclipse of May 29, 1919
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Solar eclipse of May 29, 1919 :

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.)


 * I like how you set up why this certain eclipse was import due to trying to prove Einstein's theory. It really helped put into context why this this was so important, due to them missing or not being able to see previous eclipses. However I do think that there are some parts that are too detailed. I don't think that It is important as to why the other eclipses were missed, just that they were missed. For example you say that because the Titanic sank, there was superstition around the eclipse, I think you could just say that there was superstition about that eclipse. I also think you should say what theory Einstein was trying to prove, cause that way you could link to another article talking more about this theory. I do like how you gave a lot of background to some of the topics, while I still think that all of the detail is not necessary, some background on a topic can be good, Which is something that probably needs some work on my draft.