User:SpencerPaddock/Agricola (book)/Anuragngoel Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Spencer Paddock


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
In the intro of the article I have noticed that more citation is added and slightly paraphrased the language which is a great.

The summary section also sounds a lot better as you have explained some important sections from the book like section 18,28. I would recommend you to reduce amount of times you referred to reference number 2 cause as we know we want different point of views from other scholars so if you can find any other resource that will be a great addition BUT overall your summary section has a lot of new good content compare to the original article so well done.

The themes and the style sections that you written are a lot more easy to understand compare to the original article and you have provided a new reader with two educational view points which is really good.

I have noticed missing citation gaps that you have filled so thats great and according to me you have done a good job on editing this article, all I would say is if you can add some info about what is main point in the book like a plot.