User:Makylam18/Management of dyslexia/Michellevp16 Peer Review

General info
Makylam18
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Makylam18/Management of dyslexia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Management of dyslexia

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.)

Overall, the comments in the sandbox from the user do to improve the overall quality of the article.These changes are greatly needed to allow the reader to get the most clear, recent, and concise information.

Lead

The lead is clear, concise, and informative. The lead allows the reader to get a good, broad understanding of the topic. The lead does a great job at touching on major sections in the lead even if it is just a sentence or two. The lead does a good job at presenting information that will be touched on later.

Content and Source/References

As to the content of the article, the article is clearly well structured. The article does seem up to date. In the section for "recent developments", I would recommend looking into new recent developments only if there are any reliable, valid articles. By doing this, the section would greatly benefit.

Tone and Balance

Overall, the article is neutral. The articles claims do not appear biased. Additionally, the article does not have a particular viewpoint. The content of the article provides the reader with a neutral stand point.

Organization

As previously mentioned, the article is well structured and clearly presented. I do not see any major grammar or spelling issues. Nonetheless, I would recommend looking in more detail.

Images and Media

Although images are not essential, I believe this article could possible benefit from more images.