User:Maddie beckley/Trudier Harris/Annacaroline01 Peer Review

General info
Maddie beckley
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

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.)

Lead:
Has the lead been updated?

Yes, the lead has been updated to include her numerous job titles.

Does the lead include a brief summary of the article?

Yes, the lead could be edited to include a little more information about her notable books, publication, etc.

Is the lead concise?

Yes, the lead is very concise.

Content:
Is the content added relevant to the topic?

Yes, I see where you added a good amount of background info, which is essential to understanding more about Trudier Harris.

Is the content added up-to-date?

Yes.

Is their content that does not belong?

No, all added info is relevant.

Tone and Balance:

Is the content added neutral?

Yes, all content is added in a neutral manner.

Are there any viewpoints that are overrepresented?

NO, I think all viewpoints are important to add to this page.

Sources:
Are the sources current?

Yes.

Do the links work?

Yes.

Organization:

Is the content added well-written?

"She is a professor Professor Emerita at the University of Alabama" just checking to see if the word professor should be there twice.

Are there grammatical or spelling errors?No, Most information is given in a grammatically correct way.

Overall Impressions:
Has the content added improved the article?

Yes, the content added to her background is very important to understanding more about who Trudier Harris really is.

What are the strengths of the article?

The background section of this article is very strong.

How can the content be improved?

Maybe add another section on the awards/reviews of her works.