User:Violetzq/Code Kunst/Acho98 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Violetzq
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Violetzq/sandbox

Lead evaluation
The lead is about the same as the original version of the article, but still reflects that new content that has been added. The lead does a great job at giving good background information and has a good introductory sentence. It is also very concise and had sufficient details.

The only suggestion I have is to maybe generalize the lead more. It talks a little too much about his "life and career" which already has its own section.

Content evaluation
The added content is relevant to the topic and is very up-to-date. There was a "Life and career" section that was added which is extremely important to include in an article about an artist. I would suggest adding in an Awards & Nominations section and a list of Tours & Concerts. These are just a few sections I have seen among other articles of artists and I think that it is relevant information.

Tone and balance evaluation
The content is very neutral. The new information that has been added are all facts and none of them involve personal opinions and all the information are equally represented. The content does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All of the sources are relevant and all of them are current and up-to-date. These sources also reflect the available literature on the topic and the links are all fully functional.

Organization evaluation
From my perspective, the content is well written and easy to read because of how clear and concise it is. I didn't notice any major grammatical or spelling errors, but there were some minor grammatical errors throughout the article. So I would recommend reading through it again, even reading it aloud to yourself helps pinpoint where the errors are. Each of the sections are well-organized and they reflect the major points of the topic.

Images and media evaluation
There is currently no media or images within the article. I would suggest adding some pictures of the artist and of him on the survival shows or interacting with fans.

Overall evaluation
Overall, the article seems to be heading into the right direction of becoming more detailed and adding in new information. The content provided definitely enhances the overall quality of the article and makes it more complete. There is always room for improvements, so I would suggest finding more content about the artist to implement to further enhance the article.