User:Morwenna782/Na Hyeseok/Fiondion Peer Review

Guiding questions:

 * The lead seems to just say artwork, so it is unclear if this was edited or not.
 * There is no introductory sentence
 * No there is no brief description.
 * No information.
 * N/A

Guiding questions:

 * Yes, the content added is relevant.
 * Yes, it is very up-to-date.
 * It seems that all the information is present and belongs.
 * The content is all there and addresses the topics historically and leaves no gaps within the history.

Guiding questions:

 * The content is neutral overall.
 * The article does not seem biased, other than the information about her career and being a woman but this information is beneficial to her life and career.
 * It seems that you covered the content equally over their lifetime.
 * I believe that this article is not trying to persuade anyone in a specific way and is overall unbiased.

Guiding questions:

 * Yes, the content is all backed up by some form of another source.
 * The content is reflected positively within the sources.
 * The sources are thorough and reflect similar information within the article.
 * Yes, the sources all seem to be current and relatable.
 * All of these articles seem diverse from different authors and websites.
 * It's hard to find any other articles, other than these that are accurate and work.
 * Yes, the links all seem to be working.

Guiding questions:

 * The content is well written and concise, but can maybe be a bit more formal.
 * Not that I can spot.
 * I believe that this content can be broken down into smaller sections.

Guiding questions:

 * N/A
 * N/A
 * N/A
 * N/A

Guiding questions:

 * I think the added information is very beneficial to the existing article.
 * The newly added information opens a deeper understanding of who Na Hyeseok was and opens a wider view and opinion.
 * Although this is a draft, it is very well done but can maybe be worded a bit more formally.

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.)