User:MiAg6820/Blood Clot Boy/Giannamadden Peer Review

General info
MiAg6820
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:MiAg6820/Blood Clot Boy (Draft 1)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Does not exist

Lead
While I think that the lead section is off to a good start, I think some things should definitely be added to it to make it more descriptive, specific, and informative. I think that one thing to get you started would be to move the sentence "A majority of American tales" to the lead section as I think this sentence would be great to give your audience more of an overview rather than incorporating it into your story section. I will say that what you have so far for the lead section is definitely clear, concise and helpful for me as a reader to understand who and what Blood Clot Boy is as well as the overarching significance.

Content
I would say that in terms of representing content gaps, I would say that this definitely helps close a much needed equity gap, especially since this article is talking about Native American history which has often been whitewashed for many people around the world. I think that the content is up to date and the sources that were used make sense as there are many primary sources in here as well as secondary sources that allow for people to see the many different perspectives that come with this story. I honestly don't think that there's too many things missing. But, I think one thing that I would've liked to have seen is which tribe was the first to come up with this story. You mention that several tribes tell that tale, but I think it would be cool to see which tribe was the one that originally started telling that story and how the other tribes started telling it as well.

Tone and Balance
When it comes to the tone and balance, I would say that overall the article comes across as neutral and has a neutral tone. However, there's one section in your Arapaho version that's minor but I think should be taken into consideration. You use the word "always" when you talk about the Arapaho version of the Blood Clot Boy myth. So, I think it would be wise to get rid of that word so that way you don't somehow set off Wikipedia's notifications about you being one-sided in your arguments.

Sources and References
I think that while the sources that this person used were overall very effective, up to date, and diverse, I noticed that the texts aren't referenced in the article as much as they should be. My advice is going to be to go back through the article with a fine tooth comb and really make sure that you cite an article whenever you mention it. To be completely honest, it's okay if every sentence has a reference number because that just shows that you're giving credit where it is needed and Wikipedia will applaud you for that. Besides, the goal of this is to inform rather than persuade an audience.

Organization
I think that overall, the way that your article is organized is very clear, concise and easy to read and I think definitely the way that you organized the "Story" section with a subsection of each version of the story is very helpful to me as a reader. I also noticed that there were no errors in your grammar or spelling which definitely shows the time and energy that was put into this article. As I reiterated earlier on in the lead section, I think that the lead could definitely be added to a little more just to give us a little bit more background.

Images and Media
There are no images or media here in this article so this section will be skipped.

For New Articles Only
This is a stub article so this section will be skipped.

Overall Impressions
Since this is a stub article I would say that the information that has been added had helped this article so much more in terms of educating audiences but also uplifting Native people's culture and voices. The definite strengths of the content that has been added has got to be the fact that each of the myth version in the "Story" section are very well detailed and it also does a nice job of keeping a neutral tone throughout the whole article. However I think the biggest piece is going to be trying to make that lead section a little bit longer just so that way readers can get a little bit more context about Native American myths as a whole as well as a general overview of Blood Clot Boy before you get into the smaller details of each version of the story. Also I think another thing that really needs to be revisited is source referencing. I went back to some of the sources that you put down in your reference list and noticed that you forgot to cite in many places where you were trying to paraphrase which could get your article flagged if you don't address it. I recommend going back and looking at your notes, sources, and article to try and cite the sentence that reference any of the sources that you cited. You want to cite a source whenever you mention something that was talked about at any point in the resources that you found because you want people to be able to tell the difference between someone else thoughts and your own thoughts. But to end on a more positive note, I think that your article was very well thought out and is a thoughtful contribution that will really help a lot of Wikipedia users and people alike. Keep up the great work!