User:Maggie.htj/Angela Johnson (writer)/Kjosowski Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Maggie.htj
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Maggie.htj/Angela Johnson (writer)

Lead evaluation
The lead in the original article was long and overly detailed. Maggie has edited the lead to me more concise. The information Maggie has chosen to retain in the lead clearly describes the topic and important aspects of it. The second and third sentences may be condensed. More concise versions of these two sentences may possibly combined for an event tighter lead.

Content evaluation
Maggie added to the existing biography section. The additional information illustrates Angela Johnson's journey through life and writing. Maggie also added an entirely new section called "Writings." This information is pertinent because the article is about an author. The section is based on Johnson's own description of her work and how two others describe Johnson's work. This section sums up Johnson's style, method, and what inspires her work. I find the title of the section to be a little confusing. I thought it was going to describe various books Johnson has written. While Maggies lists Johnson's works in another section, I think the article could use some more detail about some of Johnson's more well-known books. I think the "Collaboration with Dav Pilkey" section could either be expanded into a section about more illustrators Johnson has worked with or it could be folded into another section. Maggie uses information from a 2018 article throughout the draft, so the content is up-to-date.

Tone and balance evaluation
The content is neutral.

Sources and references evaluation
The content Maggies has added is cited and comes from reliable secondary sources. Some of the references need to be edited. For example, I don't think the links for the first two and last sources will work for people who are not UW students. The reference should be OK without the link (I think). The information from the original article may need to be verified. Like this sentence for example, "Like many successful people, she can recall one special teacher who read to her, thus sparking a love of books that would blossom into a love of writing."

Organization evaluation
The writing is clear. Sentence structures could be varied a bit more. In the biography section, for example, two sentences in a row start with the word "After" then the next two start with "Rylant" and the two after that start with "Johnson." The "Writings" section also has some repetitive starts to sentences. Overall, the article is well-organized with the choice of sections and their order. (See earlier comment about "Collaboration with Dav Pilkey" section.) I think the organization with the "Writings" section could be improved by grouping Johnson's description of her work together and Hunt and Woodson's comments together instead of splitting it up.

Images and media evaluation
No images were added.

Overall evaluation
The article is more complete and gives readers a fuller understanding of the author's journey and work. The "Writings" section is was a necessary edition and it is well-written and sourced. Great job, Maggie!