User:LLLr37JC/Jesus movement/Memphis2027 Peer Review

Is the content added relevant to the topic?

- I think that the content that was added is relevant to the topic. It does a good job of adding more detail to the information that might have been missing.

Is the content added neutral?

- I think the content is neutral, I don't see it leaning toward one way. I think the new information does a good job at just stating the facts.

Is all the new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

- All of the new information is backed up with information and an option to easily find the source for that information within the text and can also be found clearly and easily at the bottom of the page

Is the new content organized?

- I think that the new information is in the right places nothing stood out to me about them being in the wrong place. All the new information is connected and nicely added into the right places.

What are the strengths of the content added

- I like that in the 3rd paragraph you guys added how the 2 movements were similar. I also liked how you guys pointed out that in the interview with Sean Dietrich, Pederson explained that he was not the one to coin the term but he was still credited with being the founder of the term

General info
LLLr37JC, Rswendra
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:LLLr37JC/Jesus movement
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Jesus movement:

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.)