User:Random2187/Agamemnon/JLW546 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User:Random2187


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Random2187/Agamemnon


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The first impression I had was how clearly structured this draft is. The reworking of the contents section at the beginning works well and clearly reflects the additions. The additions would work well alongside the other parts of the original article. The "In Media and Art" section works well to link other media without flooding the page with too many pictures.

The coverage balance was mostly good. I liked how in a few parts, different interpretations of versions of texts were explained. This was done well under the 'Sailing for Troy' subsection paragraph about the sacrifice of Iphigenia. However, the beginning of the section titled 'The Curse of the House of Atreus' did feel off topic. The first three paragraphs of that section do set up the story leading to Agamemnon, but are you comfortable dedicating that much space in the article to it? Would a shorter, more generalized summary be a better fit to keep that section focused and on the main topic?

The content neutrality and sources are both great. At no point does it seem that a certain opinion or interpretation is being pushed. This is helped by the use of reliable primary sources as the most used evidence. There were a few instances of missing citations. Under ' The Iliad' section there is the sentence, "Although not the equal of Achilles in bravery, Agamemnon was a representative of "kingly authority". " That quote 'kingly authority' is not attributed. And the last sentence of The Iliad section, also needs a citation. Those are small fixes though.

Overall, I would say this draft is really good for organization, balance, and sources. There are only a few details that should be cleaned up, but that is all.