User:Wmalvey/Arch of Constantine/Njacobs9 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(Wmalvey)


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


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead: n/a (I don't see any changes made to the lead of the article)

Content: I see that content has only been added to two of the sections, which very well might be all the new information your research uncovered. The information that you did add seems to be well-sourced, up-to-date, and relevant to each respective section, and also focused on grounding. I do see potential to add more detail related to the kind of information you added, such as the implications of the different scholarly theories you mention, and how they relate to the other theories already in the article.

Tone and Balance: Your tone appears to be very neutral when expressing the perspectives of different scholars, and it's made clear that you're not presenting the information as fact, but as varying scholarly perspectives. I do think the wording of the first section is a little hard to understand, however, and the flow between the first two sentences doesn't seem linear, but I see that they make more sense within the article when separated by other information.

Sources and References: Your sources appear to be properly formatted and cited, and include both a book and a journal. I noticed that there are only two that you drew from in what you wrote, but I assume your research involved more.

Organization: The content seems properly organized into topic sections, and is generally easy to follow.