User:Manes-notatis/Genie Chance/Sevanzandt Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Manes-notatis


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Genie Chance
 * Genie Chance

Evaluate the drafted changes
The lead is a little short; it needs information about the content of the article.

I think that the content itself is sufficient but could always benefit from more contributions.

The tone does not feel biased or persuasive.

All of the links work and the content seems relevant to the subject of the article! 16 and 17 do not have links.

I think the article is organized well. I like that it is chronological and I did not notice any spelling or grammatical errors.

I don't know if my peer added the images, but they are missing captions.