User:Remus210/Aegae (Macedonia)/Coolbutterfly Peer Review

General info
Remus210
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Remus210/Aegae (Macedonia)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Aegae (Macedonia):

Lead
I like the lead and think that it's a good summary of what is being described in the article. I like the way that you split the lead in half to create a more concise version of the introduction. However, I think that you should also summarize other sections of the article like the tomb of Philip II and the Palace of Agai.

Clarity of Article Structure
The content that you added is well-written and easy to read. There are no spelling or grammatical errors. The content is well-organized and I think the basics section was a great thing to add but the tomb section should be added. The order that you have the content in makes sense to me.

Coverage Balance
I think that you should add more detail to the tomb of Philip II and the Palace of Agai because these are very important historical details to the area. Everything seems to be on-topic. There are no significant viewpoints missing of what is written. I don't think that there are any conclusions being made.

Content Neutrality
I think that the content you have added is completely neutral and acts as a clear reflection of some of the sources describing Aegae.