User:Sld99/Splitting (psychology)/Jpow05 Peer Review

General info
(provide username) Sld99
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Sld99/Splitting (psychology)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Splitting (psychology)

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.)

The lead section of the draft is well written and also concise. It gives a good summary of what is talked about in the article, however, sections discussing each major topic in the article should be added in so those sections of the article will be properly introduced.

One of the articles, specifically the second article in 1989, may be a bit outdated compared to the other articles the author used to create her draft, so I advise to try and find something more up to date or similar to what was used in the current draft.

While the content that is being worked on had grammatical errors, the author did a very good job in pointing them out and editing them accordingly to fit best around the other sentences, or deleting unnecessary sentences. I have noticed a lot of the parentheses sentences are being deleted, which I agree with her decision on doing as they seem more like a conversation and out of place than helping in adding more to the article.