User:Mgferris13/National Treasure: Book of Secrets/Highspeed2 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Mgferris13


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mgferris13/National_Treasure%3A_Book_of_Secrets?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * National Treasure: Book of Secrets

Evaluate the drafted changes
The first reference, Rotten Tomatoes, is a highly reputable source so the new content is backed up. The source is up to date and the information reflects the article accurately. The links to the webpages work to give the audience a place to check the sources used. This is one of the best soruces available. You did a good job including multiple sources for online ratings so that the information is from multiple points of view. Metacritic is a good reputable source, the information displayed is accurate according to the site. The information is unbias, up to date and from individual reviews which get wieghed and averaged. Cinema score and IMDb are also both reputable review based weboages that meet all the criteria of the checklist. However, I could not find much information on JustWatch. I would remove this source or add a link to inofmation on it. Maybe replace it with a better source. The review included by film critic Roger Ebert is good. He is an extremely reputable American film critic and you did good to not form any bias aaround his review. It seems like the information with the british film critic is abstract and not connected to anything. The information included under your "where to watch" section is accurate and up to date according to the provided link. I still couldn't find much on this source other than the information provided accurately reflects the site. Both sections added are relevant to the article overall and include helpful information other than the one abstract sentence that I do not think belongs. All content added is neutral and accuratley represents the source they came from. The content is clear and well written, straight to the point with two broken down sections. The added information adds quality to the overall article. I think one improvement you could make is possibly addding where the movie cannot be viewed since it is accecible on so many platforms.