User:Margaritaa3/User:Hquint8/Dale Campbell/Margaritaa3 Peer Review

Lead
The lead has been updated to reflect the new content added but not much information is provided into the sections. The lead doesn't include an introductory sentence that describes the articles topic, only in the career section they explain more but they could add more into the biography sections. The lead does include brief descriptions of the articles major sections but not much information is put into them. The lead does have information that is included in the article. The lead is overall concise but should add more to them as mentioned.

Content
The content that is added is relevant to the topic and it is added up to date. I do feel like there is much more content mission, I feel like they could certainly add more to each sections. The article does deal with one of Wikipedias equity gaps. The article as well also addresses topics related to historically topics about their art and what they make.

Tone and Balence
The content is neutral and there appears to be no claims that appear to biased toward a particular position. In the biography section, I feel like they could add more, it seems a bit underrepresented. The content does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position of another. They did good on overall keeping it neutral and to the point.

Sources and References
The new content is backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. The content does accurately reflect what the cited sources say about Campbells carvings and the sources and content are thorough as well. These sources are somewhat current since they were published in 2017. The sources are from 3 different authors. All the links work good, just in the bibliography section, they don't seem to be able to click on them.

Organization
The content is well written and easy to read due to the sections provided. It does not contain any grammatical errors. They overall did good in organizing their article.

Images and Media
The article does include an image that enhances the topic of the article and it is caption very well. I think it does adhere to Wikipedias copyright regulations since it was not mentioned that it was the artists artwork, it may have been an example of what she did, I think it is good to mention that in the article.

Overall impressions
The content provided does make a bigger and better difference to how the article was. It would just be better if the was more information about the artist about their education and how they got to that point in making cravings. I liked how the sections are divided into so we know what we are going to read next.

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

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.)