User:Nycgirl00/Doge of Venice/Ldray Peer Review

General info
Nycgirl00
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Nycgirl00/Doge of Venice
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Doge of Venice :
 * Doge of Venice :

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.

The brief addition to the lead is solid, but I'm not seeing any citations or references (perhaps that's just me though).

The history section is quite substantial and definitely adds a lot more clarifying context, however I do think the information can have a bit of a better flow/a sense of cohesiveness.

The additions to the 'Selection of the Doge' section provide a lot more information/context on the actual election process. The 'Notable Doges' section is a really great addition; I do wonder if you can add a bit more about each listed doge?

Overall - I think you made really smart and effective additions to the existing article but sometimes the language feels a bit too spaced out/lacks a consistent tone/flow (I hope that makes sense). ""