User:Michaelchan1998/Siege of Carthage/Jway04 Peer Review

Hey Michael, I like your choice of article. Sorry for all the confusion with this peer edit, I've just been confused with the system. The information you currently have is great, you may want to consider further updating, especially in the lead section as well as talking about the battle itself. I think it may be helpful to go back and re-write some of your sentences, especially ones that border with showing a bias, for example ,"Rome's refusal to curb the behaviour of Masinasia" has language that may not be as neutral as it could be. In this context, the information should be presented factually and formally and without bias. It also would be very interesting to see what additional information you could provide about the siege and other factors that may have been involved.I think you're off to a great start and this article will be great after the next additions you make. Thanks Michael! Jway04

Thanks, Jway04 for this review (and your other one as well)! I'll comment on both here. You are a very supporting, encouraging peer reviewer, but what I want you to work on is your ability to provide constructive criticism to your peers. For your next round of reviews I really want you to work on providing specific feedback to help improve your classmates' work. For example, on your other review you say "For the most part, there are a few sections where it gets confusing and there are typos, if you'd like I can point them out to you, just let me know!" - take out the middle man and just list the typos, that is way more helpful for your peers. Good work (especially since you accidentally did two reviews), but your goal is to provide more detailed, systematic feedback that your peer can then work with. Grade: 17/20 Gardneca (talk) 12:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)