User:Sarahhelennicholson/Women Who Kill/Reemslim Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Sarahhelennicholson


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Sarahhelennicholson/Women Who Kill


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Women Who Kill

Evaluate the drafted changes
After reading the current version of the article, and the new draft; it is evident that there are some differences between the two. The original version goes into more detail about the ending of the movie, and the resolution of what happens to Morgan, while the revised version ends the plot summary at "Alex went missing". This is something I think can be worked on. The revised version of the article leaves out important information about the plot, it does not allow the audience a full summary of the movie. I understand not wanting to spoil the ender to those readers who have not yet seen the film, however this can be done by creating a section and heading it "conclusion", to both warn the reader and appease their desire to know the ending.

The article is backed up with relevant, recent, and credible sources that have working links. This is something I think you did very well- it could also be beneficial to create a section in your article that summarizes the reviews the movie got (think rottentomatoes, rating out of 5 stars, etc.).

Although I do believe the content added is valuable, I also think the content that was removed is valuable as well. I understand not wanting to over summarize a movie plot, however adding specific details like the passport being lit on fire, and Morgan waking up to Simone clipping her nails is not important in the grander picture- especially to an audience who has yet to see the movie. This may be something you consider revising, keeping it broad but hitting the main points, or climaxes, of the movie will help create a better plot summary than focusing on the details!

The article is written very well and maintains an unbiased tone, it uses neutral language as well as great organizational skills. I appreciate the appropriate headers and sections that allow the audience to be guided through the article. Furthermore, there are not many uses of images, however the addition of the chart that portrays the different awards the film won, is a great addition! I do think that using images, such as the movie cover, could add more character to the article and allow the audience to visualize the movie more.

Overall the article is great, and I enjoyed the changes from the original. My only advice would be that details aren't always beneficiary, or needed, and to focus on the larger picture- as well as to add images! Great job- Reem Slim.


 * Hey, nice work on this peer review. I especially like the suggestion to add a table summarizing the reviews in a reception section. I hope that  considers it.  Groceryheist (talk) 18:45, 3 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Also by the way it looks like a different Wikipedia editor added the plot section to the article after  copied it to her sandbox.

Thank you for the great evaluation! I just noticed that the original article had a plot added as pointed out above, I just finished watching the film for the second time so I could get a better understanding and I'm going to update my knowledge with the existing plot now. Thanks again! - 15:49, 4 February 2021