User:Whatifidontwannabe/Lethe/Studiesin... Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Whatifidontwannabe


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Whatifidontwannabe/Lethe?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Lethe

Evaluate the drafted changes
Overall the lead does reflect the edited content provided by the user. The introduction sentence is well-written, and the topic has been properly introduced. I do think that adding a little more information about the goddess in the lead paragraph would be beneficial. The lead did not contain any unneeded information, and was clear and concise.

The content provided was relevant to the topic, and the information was up to date. I do not feel that there is any content missing, overall I feel that the content was excellently executed. I do think that I would have enjoyed more of your content in the role of religion section though! I don't feel that there is any content missing. No equity gaps are mentioned but I don't know if that would be possible with this particular topic.

I did not sense any opinion or bias in the writing, the article was overall very informative. I think that all viewpoints were accurately represented, there was no one single viewpoint that was too heavily focused on. The tone and balance were well done.

As far as the sourcing goes, I would also provide your citations that you did for the photographs directly under them rather than just simply at the bottom of the page, just for proper consistency. I didn't notice any information that was not cited, so well done! I also went through quite a few of your links, and they all worked properly. As for the books you cited, they were all done correctly as well. All sources were fairly current as well. There was a variety of sources used, but I did not see many that were done by female authors, so maybe that is something you could be on the lookout for!

The content organization flowed nicely and was concise. I didn't notice any grammar or spelling mistakes, but it can't hurt to proofread a few more times before submitting! I felt that all major points were addressed in an accurate manner.

I felt the images provided enhanced the quality of the article, the original article was a bit bland and did not provide any images at all aside from that of the river. I appreciated that you incorporated art in the article. The images were properly captioned, and weren't too wordy. As far as I could tell, there weren't any copyright issues, and the images were very aesthetically pleasing.

Overall, I think the editor of this article did a great job. I particularly liked the images choices and placement. My only recommendations would be to add a little more detail in your information if possible, and to cite your image directly underneath so that readers can go directly to the image source. -Studiesin...