User:Savmanbanans/Readability/Lstockington Peer Review

General info
Savmanbanans
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
The deletion of unnecessary sources was a really good change, it gave people a much more concise base of information and made reviewing for accuracy much easier.

The paring down of unnecessary information was well executed.

The "Readability of Popular Texts" section as it feels bare bones and not important as it is now only referencing Wikipedia, it could include examples of popular texts and their scores on a variety of formulas for instance.I'm not sure why there is a subsection dedicated to the George Clare studies, I think it could be folded into the Early Research section or deleted in it's entirety.

The Text Leveling section has 3 sources listed for it's first sentence which seems excessive.