User:Meganmsweeney13/Deborah Sampson/Dannysullivan12417 Peer Review

General info

 * 1) Yes the content is added neutral
 * No, there is no claims of any biases.
 * 1) There view points give you enough information about Deborah Sampson
 * 2) The article is back by reliable sources and they give good information about Deborah Sampson and what happened to her on how she got caught being in the United States Army and discharged because she is a female when she was caught.
 * 3) The content is well written and a good read because of the information she gave about Deborah Sampson
 * No, there are no spelling errors.
 * 1) Yes, the article gets to the point and delivers good information.
 * 2) Yes the sources are reliable
 * 3) Yes, the article she picked does have pictures to go with her topic of Deborah Sampson
 * 4) The images in the article are well informed. The image gives the reader a lot of information about Deborah Sampson and her life. For example her Birth/Death place, her service to the American Army, years served, etc.
 * No, the lead is not overly detailed, it has just enough information for the reader.
 * 1) The lead has information that is present in the article.
 * 2) There is no bias in the sandbox draft

The sandbox draft had good information about Deborah Sampson. The sandbox draft was very well written and her information would help out the article a lot.


 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Meganmsweeney13/Deborah Sampson


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