User:ReaperV13/Robert the Bruce (film)/Seahorseswimming Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

I'm reviewing ReaperV13's work and the topic is the film, Robert the Bruce.


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Sandbox Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ReaperV13/Robert_the_Bruce_%28film%29?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Bibliography: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ReaperV13/Robert_the_Bruce_%28film%29?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


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

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.)

Everything in this article seems to be relevant to the article topic. The article is already really well organized and filled with information. The way it is written is in a neutral tone because it is very informative on the film, so lots of information and not a lot of opinion based sentences in there anyway. The article seems to be pretty balanced on the representation of information throughout, until near the end in the "Critical Response" section which could use some more critic reviews, they only provide one source right now, and I think the audience would benefit from more reviews to get a better understanding of the outside world's opinion on the film when it was released. As well as, the "Accolades" section the Wiki page asks, me at least when I'm on the page, to convert the section into prose because it would be "better represented," so that may be another this ReaperV13 could do to improve the article. The citations are all good and provide credible, unbiased sources of information relating to the topic at hand. Most of this information is coming from articles on the internet and sources that review films on the regular so they know what they're talking about. None of the information is out of date, it's a fairly recent release, so most of the sources are after it came out in 2019. While a few of the sources are from before the release date, they're only like a year prior, so pretty current references. This article is well organized and well saturated with information already, it's just really cleaning it up and honing in on the sections that are lacking that is what is really going to elevate this article.