User:Nuc13arPanda/Adam Pierce/Alfa7158 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Nuc13arPanda


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Mice Parade


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
I think that you need to add more information about the person. I think you need more information about the person at the start. As you move to your second paragraph, I got a bit lost, may be having a heading for the second paragraph would be a good idea. I think the led is concise, but needs more information. I could not tell if content is natural as the the contents does not have any reference that show where the writer took the information from. However, the article sound like presenting a person without any bias. The source provide by the writer are mostly unreliable source. For example, Facebook is not a unreliable, and All Music website which I am not sure if is an unreliable source to use as well. https://www.adampearcemusic.com/about-1 this a link of Adam Pierce website. I am unsure about why you called the article Mice Parade instead of Adam Pierce. I do not think this article meets the notability requirements. overall, I think the writer, did really great job organizing his contents. However,