User:NRobinson22/28 Days Later/Kgroft Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

NRobinson22


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:NRobinson22/28 Days Later


 * 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.)

Lead:

The lead was strong and well articulated. It wasn't overly wordy or stretching on for too long. It was concise and informative and lacked any sense of bias. It was also full of reliable and informative links that affirmed what was being written about in the article.

Content:

The lead plus the plot break down were both very well written. All parts of the article were up to date and relevant to the topic. The links and references provided were neutral and strengthened the understanding of the article as a whole.

Tone and Balance:

The content was neutral without bias and did not attempt to persuade or influence the reader in anyway. All information given was very matter of fact and avoided any claims that were not represented in the film. No viewpoints seemed to be under or over represented in any way.

Resources and References:

The links provided within the article seemed very reliable, though there was no reference section or bibliography at the bottom of the page. There were no citation either.

Organization:

The article was straight forward and easy to read. There were no gaps or any mistakes that distracted me in any way. It was fluid and informative without being boring or dragging on.

Images and Media:

The article is lacking images and media.

New Article:

There are no sources in terms of bibliography. There are links, but no citations or secondary sources. The format of the two sections definitely look like other articles on wiki. I think once the article gets its references straightened out, it'll be very good.

Overall impressions:

It was great article. Super informative with well articulated summaries of the plot. I enjoyed it very much!