User:SylvanoPadilla/Sunday Jack Akpan/Willrembert360 Peer Review

General info
SylvanoPadilla
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:SylvanoPadilla/Sunday Jack Akpan
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Sunday Jack Akpan
 * Sunday Jack Akpan

Lead
I noticed that your draft has no lead, and some of the information that should be present there is in the Biography. I recommend using the first 2-3 sentences of your biography as your lead or using the existing lead of your artist's current wiki as inspiration (that helped me a lot)!

Content
For the most part, your content is all relevant and on-topic to each section. There's sufficient up-to-date information article that I noticed. Of course there are a couple areas of improvement you could use for the content in the article, most notably that your Artwork (the one with 3 examples) is empty. Your Solo Exhibitions and Education sections are also empty but I understand if that's because of a lack of information about those topics in the research you've done so far (there were some sections that were hard to fill out in mine because the sources didn't talk much about them). Either way, these sections require content if you can find any.

I also suggest you elaborate more on any artistic movements your artist is a part of, if you can find any additional sources that discuss it.

Tone and Balance
Your tone and balance is mostly stable and neutral, and you describe the information and topics of your article without bias. There are a couple suggestions I want to make to improve your neutral language, but keep in mind that these are fairly minor:


 * In your biography section, change the phrase "He is very proud" to something like "he has shown pride over".
 * Also in your biography section, change the phrase "his best rank and time" to something like "his most acclaimed rank and time" since you don't want the reader think you believe that time to be his 'best.'

Sources and References
While I think your bibliography has a good collection of reliable sources, my biggest criticism is that nothing is directly cited. You haven't directly linked any of the info in your draft to the sources in your biography, so the reader won't know what information is coming from where. This is, personally, the most important change you need to make to your draft before you finish. If you aren't sure how to cite your article, you can check existing articles to see how they're formatted.

Organization
I noticed that, besides a mostly well-presented structure, your formatting feels a little messy in some places. Like I mentioned earlier, you don't have a lead, and I feel like the double-spacing of the bullet points in your Publications section is unnecessary. Your References are also formatted incorrectly, but that will be easy to fix once you begin citing your information, since they'll appear in the correct format as you cite.

Additionally, you don't need to describe your artist's exhibitions in their section. A bulleted list with date and location info is ok!

Overall Impressions
While I think your article has good content and descriptions, it feels unfinished. There are empty sections, no direct citations, and some minor (but fixable) structural errors. Still, the additional research you've provided is a significant improvement from the original stub.