User talk:101235k/Lawson Thomas

Peer Review Comment
I think that this article is very well done in terms of the content it provides. I think that it is well-researched and cites peer-reviewed academic sources. I also believe that Judge Lawson’s life is told well through a neutral lens and all of the important points are included in this article. I believe that it has the potential to be a very useful resource for the public to learn about this judge. I think that the introductory part of the article draws the reader in well and gives key information that is later expanded upon. I enjoyed reading the article and was thoroughly impressed by the content. Some changes I would suggest are going through and proofreading the article a little bit more to fix some grammatical issues I saw, such as beginning a sentence with the word ‘because’. Additionally, I think that you could alter the structure a little bit by either expanding upon the smaller sections or combing them with larger ones. Specifically, the personal life and honors sections could be expanded upon a little bit. Overall, I believe the most important change to make is to proofread to improve readability. I think that using simple language and getting directly to the point in this article is great because it allows everyone to access the knowledge, but I do think that there are some small grammatical issues that if improved would really help the readability of the article.Neha576 (talk) 00:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
The article covers a general description of Lawson Edward Thomas well. It chronologically orders the article starting with early life and education to personal life. However, the article can be improved in its organization by putting the personal life section with early life and education or putting the honors section closer to “Legal practice and civil rights protests” section. I think you should also add an impact or significance section. Adding these sections, improving readability, and creating more links to/from the article would best improve your article because it would increase traffic and improve comprehensiveness of the article and general understanding of the topic. Good luck! Riyeng (talk) 02:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)