User:QueenStarrUniverse/Competence factor/MaskedSparrow Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

QueenStarrUniverse, Kkiing08, GFulller, and Dayvid3589.


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:QueenStarrUniverse/Competence factor


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * It does not exist at this time.

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 lead has new content that pertains to the subject. The lead does not outline what will be discussed in the article. Not all of the content in the lead is discussed elsewhere. The lead is very concise and does not have any unnecessary details.

The content is relevant and up to date, but it is not complete at this time.

The article is neutral, without bias, and is unpersuasive.

The sources are reliable and convey the information found within the article. The resources are highly reputable and do not need to be replaced. The sources appear current and appear to be written by diverse authors. The links are up to date.

It is well written and organized. Additions to the lead will aid in organization and provide greater flow to the article. There are no errors in the article.

There is a diagram though it is highly confusing as it is not labeled. Otherwise there are no issues to the media content.

It meets the notability requirements. The article lacks sources and needs additional sourcing and links to other articles.

The content is good and improves the quality. Strengths are that they are covering material not already covered. The content can be improved by adding more.