User:ThunderhillMc/Déjà vu/Addisonel Peer Review

General info
ThunderhillMc
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead: This edit does not focus on the lead but instead the article

Content: The editor did a fantastic job of making the changes subtle yet demanding and very seamless. It looks as if the article was written by one individual instead of as a collaboration

Tone and Balance: The tone is very neutral and provides factual statements in the writer's own voice.

Sources and references: The sources chosen seem reputable, however, they are outdated. Your topic is obscure so I can understand how that may affect your research pool. Great job with your limited resources!

Organization: If anything the organization of the article has improved. Unnecessary sections were removed and it is very easy to read.

Images and Media: The images were a much needed addition to this article. It brings an extra dimension to the explanation and makes it look, visually, twenty times better.

Overall Impressions: This group did an amazing job. The sources were reputable additions to the text. It makes more sense and is more concise. Overall you guys did an awesome job.