User:Kelseymanchester/Greek mafia/Tucker28 Peer Review

General info
Kelseymanchester
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The current organization of the Greek Mafia article is decently inadequate, but the proposed revised table of contents is a lot better and appropriately orders the sections and subsections in their respective hierarchy of importance. The new organization features the history and important names of the mafia at the beginning of the article, so readers can easily gather the context and background of the mafia before going into more auxiliary details. I agree that the activities section should directly follow the history section because readers will have a cohesive understanding of the material, first context then what the mafia does as well as their influence on Greece and neighboring areas. Additionally, I agree that the Godfathers of the Night does not need its own section and can be grouped into the history section. Overall, I think the revisions that are intended to be added will significantly improve the quality of the article. I think another improvement to be made could be the overall quality of writing including grammar changes and more sophisticated, professional language.

I'm not sure if the subsection about Africa is needed or not, it is proposed to be removed, I think it could be briefly mentioned, but it possibly does not need its own subsection considering its length is much shorter than the other subsections about other areas.

If it is possible, adding images or any sort of measuring graph or visual may improve the overall appearance of the article and appeal to readers to view the article-- additionally visuals might help ease the process of learning about the Greek Mafia.

(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.)

Peer Review 2

The overall quality of the page is great, all I would say is to read over for grammatical errors. The tone is balanced, the sections are well-balanced, the page also has great organization and flow, the information is easy to digest and comprehend. I think the quality of the page has significantly improved since the original version.