User:Ngwinn/Neuromodulation/Tykerriagrey Peer Review

General info
(provide username) Ngwinn
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Neuromodulation
 * 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.)

I really enjoyed reading over the article. I do feel as if the information that was presented within the article was very informative. It provided a clear picture over everything that was given within the text. It was very understanding. I did enjoy it because the pictures gave you a chance to see exactly what was being talked about. Also within the picture if you was hover over the link, it gave some background information as well. The links within the article worked as well with the few in which I did click on. The article definitely flowed together because it broke each system down which basically helps understand the information more. The article was very biased. It did not lean towards one specific topic or favor one topic in a different way than the other. All of the content within the article was backed by a source. The sources within the article were current secondary sources. I do feel as if the article is more complete. It flows well together, and the information which was added played a contribution to that as well.