User talk:2601:1C0:8200:DB90:1143:2CFE:8375:F2B3

Review
I thought the lead section of the article was

✓Clear and easy to understand ✓Detailed ✓Fragmented ✓Had mistakes ✓Needs to be tied together better ✓Gives a good overview of the article

I thought the article’s structure was

✓Clear ✓Had several headings and subheadings arranged chronologically or by themes ✓Had images and diagrams when appropriate ✓sections about an important aspect of the topic are shorter than sections about a less important aspect

I thought the content

✓Covered many aspects of the topic ✓Gave more weight to important viewpoints and less weight to fringe ideas. ✓Included value statements like “the best” or “the most important” ✓Was written without bias toward a particular point of view ✓cited reliable sources throughout the article and as much as possible ✓included references to unnamed sources of information, such as "some people say," or "many believe"? ✓includes citation information from reliable publishers ✓includes citations from questionable websites or publishers who might like to push an agenda ✓includes euphemisms