User:Rhs2x/Space Invaders (book)/Jillian DeGrie Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Rhs2x, Aml9x, Mar318ie


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Rhs2x/Space Invaders (book)

Lead
The Lead is concise and to the point, with a good overall summary sentence. It hints at the future sections by mentioning not only the main character, but also the background and structure. The only thing I can think to add is some small reference to the reception the book in the intro. I would recommend rewording the second sentence to "This story follows the jumbled memories, letters, and dreams of some of the classmates of one Estrella González..." as that makes more sense in my opinion.

Content
All of the content is up to date. All points are relevant to the topic and necessary to the article. It has six sections plus another extra (valuable but unnecessary according to the prompt). I believe the content overall is very good and needs little work. The character section, however, needs to be finished as there are two characters without descriptions.

Tone and Balance
The article is objective, not presenting any bias. It takes a purely informative and neutral.

Sources and References
The article has the required 8 sources. The only sections with citations are the critical response section and the background section. Since we read the book in class, the other sections likely do not need any citations. My group added citations in most sections in case wikipedia was worried about summaries being credited, but I am not sure if this is necessary or not. The links all work.

Organization
The content is well written and organized logically. I only saw one typo which I referenced in the "Lead" section.

Images and Media
The included image is good in terms of placement, copyright, and captioning. I would recommend finding at least one more image as the specific assignment prompt says "images." It also makes the article a little more visually appealing.

For New Articles Only
The article has eight good sources and follows the general layout of book summary articles. It uses an info box, image, and several linked articles.

Overall impressions
The article has good comprehensive information on the book. It provides an in depth summary that includes key details as well as overall plot points. It also provides key information on the reception and background behind the book. The article is readable and approachable, not at an essay like level too advanced for wikipedia while also being professional. Overall it is a quality analysis of the book.