User:Madigwe/Astroworld Festival/Ajp624 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Madigwe


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Astroworld Festival (no sandbox version is available)


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Astroworld Festival

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:

The introductory sentence does a good job with giving a clear explanation of the Astroworld festival. I think it would be even better if it mentioned the tragedy, since it's the main point of this article. The lead does a great job of briefly describing the article's major points. It does not include any information that is unnecessary.

Content:

I think the content is very relevant, and does a great job with providing background information leading up to the festival tragedy. I would suggest adding another section about the reaction/effect after this occurred. I think it would be useful to show how big of an impact the crisis had on both Travis Scott's career and his fans. I also think that the section about the tragedy itself could be a little more detailed. It would be good to add some photos/videos of the event. It could also be good to include some photos of Tweets/ letters after the tragedy took place.

Tone and Balance:

I think this article does a great job with remaining neutral. I definitely think that the information is factual rather than opinion-based. It doesn't feel like there is any over representation or under representation.Sources and References:

The article has an adequate number of sources, and the ones that I tried to follow through links worked. They did seem to be reliable as well. As of now, though, Madison's bibliography only has a few sources listed. I think it would be beneficial to add more to reach the required amount of 15 sources.

Organization:

I think the article is very well organized. It's easy to read for the most part, with the exception of a few sentences being too long. I think each section is a good length (not too long or too short). One thing to note- the section titled "2021 crowd rush" could be capitalized.

Overall impression:

As a whole, I think this article is off to a great start! I think the history section is good to go, but more could be added to the 2021 crowd rush section. Also, I think it would be great to add another section about the aftermath of the tragedy. Without this, I don't think readers can understand the full scope of damage that this caused. Great work so far!