User:Swanson04/Personal web page/Caseymen Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Swanson04


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Draft:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Personal web page
 * Personal web page

Evaluate the drafted changes
- There was no information under the Lead section in the sandbox so I was not able to peer review that part.

- The content added is concise, clear, and easy-to-read. It's also well-written and is relevant to the chosen topic of personal web pages.

- Grammatically, there are no errors however there was just one minor spelling error. Easily fixable, 'individuals' was just spelled incorrectly.

- The content was not necessarily broken down but since it's in one paragraph it's probably pertaining to one section of the article. There's no need for it to be broken down since the content of this writing is connected together.

- Yes, the content is up to date, especially since "has become increasingly important in the 21st century" is included in the text.

- No, this content does not address Wikipedia's equity gaps.

- The tone of the article is generally neutral, and I don't sense any bias in the writing.

- The sources used in this writing is extraordinary. The first one is from a published book and the third one is from a published scientific book. The sources chosen is very reliable and scholarly.

- All the links work to the sources and other wiki articles.