User:Mkoch21Fox/African scarification/Aquach1224 Peer Review

Your article is super well written and very informative! I thought you took a neutral stance in covering the topic and went into great detail on the hairstyles. There are some punctuation errors, and some sentences could be rewritten from clarity. Such as "Figures with hair-like depictions are defined as sculptural figures who have protruding features or indentations that resemble common hair styles" could be rewritten as "Figures with hair-like depictions are sculptural figures with protruding features or indentations resembling common hair styles. " And have the same effect.

The first paragraph of the article seems a bit wordy and could use some more concise wording and punctuation. There seems to be a lot of commas that confuse my when reading what the tone of the article is. I think that with an informative article it's better to go more in depth on a subject so rather than try to shorter and fit the information within a couple paragraphs to length the information.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


 * 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.)