User:Luisa9544/Michael Spencer (engineer)/Dreamfar94488 Peer Review

General info
Luisa9544, Sethm2036, Michael248
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Luisa9544/Michael Spencer (engineer)/Bibliography:User:Luisa9544/Michael Spencer (engineer)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
Overall a very well done article with a diverse amount of info that is well written. These are just my suggestions to improve it.

Lead

 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?: I think starting with his full name (in bold) and then where he was born would read better as to what this article is about. I also feel like you should focus more on his work in the lead instead of aspirations or facts that can maybe go into "Early Life" or "Education"
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? I think it could use some more information about his research and what he's achieving.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes I think this would be an easy fix by changing "Education" to "Early Life and Education" and adding his birth and info about dad into the body instead of the lead.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is the perfect length and amount of information but I think it could use just some slight tweaking.

Content


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Everything seems pretty relevant to the topic, only note I would add is there’s some information that's not necessary to the point of this article such as “ replacing Eugene M. Deloatch”

Tone and Balance

 * Is the content added neutral? Under Social Responsibility: “The public service of Michael G. Spencer provided a lasting foundation of inspiration and innovation.” This feels biased like an opinion, maybe omit this?
 * I feel like using the term “culturally rich” is not a fact, instead of using a word like that maybe explain how so? Also add to “early life and education”
 * I would name the amount of awards instead of using an unknown like “ and achieved many awards”.

Sources and References

 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? One larger area of concern for this article is the lack of multiple sources? I noticed that most came from the only source in the bibliography. Because most of it came from one source the wiki article sounds very similar to the source you pulled from, I would be careful of Wiki’s strict rules around plagiarism.