User:Mbour181/History of dance/Prich080 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

I am currently reviewing Mbour181


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * History of dance


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * History of dance

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.)

First, I had a difficulty to see it right away I had to directly go on the page and search the user name and see what changes the user have made. The User brought in a lot of data to support


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? My peer is expanding an existing article: History of Dance. The Article has a strong lead and everything is very clear. It is easy to understand the content even if you are not a dance enthusiast.
 * 2) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement? What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?  I would tell the author to keep up the good work and it would be an improvement because the content I saw so far is already amazing. Maintenance would bring improvement. I think more content would be good. There are pictures, diversity (different cultures discussed). It is well organized and the author is definitely improving the article.
 * 3) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? The author brought a lot of data which is key because we need a reliable article. I believe that I would definitely add more data to support the article. I would also write a bit more even though the article I picked is already very strong.