User:Willrembert360/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

 * Article has no lead
 * Content that was previously in the lead has been merged with the biography

My recommendation is to take the first 3-4 sentences of the biography section and reformat them to be your lead, since they'll fit better there, or you can always use a slightly modified version of the existing article's lead.

Content

 * Somewhat satisfactory amount of content on the chosen artist
 * Some sections are left empty (some due to what I assume is a lack of existing sources)
 * Good number of notable exhibitions and artworks

From what I've seen, the existing content is on-topic and fits the article. One thing I want to make note of is that you didn't fill out your Artworks section with anything, so I suggest you include 3-4 of the artist's most important artworks. There's some issues I noticed with wording & grammar but those shouldn't be your main priority when you revise your article. Otherwise the content you've already included is good enough (but it's always a good idea to look for more through google / worldcat).

Tone & Balance
I think you mostly did a good job keeping the content of your article neutral. There were very few moments of biased language / discussion. Here's some minor suggestions to improve your descriptions:


 * In the last sentence of your biography, try swapping the word "best" for something like "most successful" or "most prolific". The word 'best' feels subjective and some might read that as a personal appraisal of this period of the artist's work.
 * Also in the last sentence of your biography, maybe you could replace "he is very proud of" with something like "he has shown pride over".

Sources and References
While I think you included a pretty good catalogue of sources, I didn't notice you directly citing anything in your article. The reader's going to have no idea what information came from which source. Your bibliography also feels unorganized; this is something I'll get into more in the Organization section.

Maybe you could try to find more sources that talk about your artist's education (since that's the section with the least info) but I understand if there weren't many you could find that talked about it.