User:ToriTrouble/Architecture of Baku/Jzdollar Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

ToriTrouble


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ToriTrouble/Architecture_of_Baku?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Architecture of Baku

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * - Everything is relevant and is about architecture. The only element I found distracting was the out of place language that occasionally cropped up. For example the use of the phrase "another example" is unbefitting of wikipedia, moreso when done twice in a row. That is among a small number of tonal issues. When you mention contemporaries in the second paragraph of your draft, I'd like to know who they are, but I understand that they are not always mentioned in the source text.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * - Of course the article is neutral. I didn't notice any bias.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * - There is quite a heavy focus on wealthy patrons of art, but there also are mentions of public works. I assume that more will be developed on a later date.
 * Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * - The links do work, a few are missing but this is a draft afterall.
 * Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * - Not yet, but the presumable source is cited in bibliography.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
 * Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * - Not yet, but the presumable source is cited in bibliography.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?

- No it is up to date