User talk:Csteph13/Siena Cathedral/Kcade1 Peer Review

Peer review

This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info Whose work are you reviewing? Csteph13 Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siena_Cathedral

Lead: The lead was unedited by the user but it still fits the article fine as Csteph13 didn't add new topics, just additional information about existing subjects. The lead is kind of long and detailed but seems necessary as the article itself is very detailed.

Content: The content is relevant and up-to-date. The user added minimal small facts that were important and helpful. I almost edited this article and didn't because it seemed so well done and completed to me already. The user did a good job adding a few more facts that weren't already stated.

Tone and Balance: The content added was neutral and had absolutely no bias, just stated as facts. As a whole, the article is very neutral and I am not swayed to an opinion.

Sources and References: There are a few links that are broken but I see they were not added by Csteph13. However, it would have been helpful if the student checked the links and fixed them or removed them. Also when I pull up the article, a notification pops up stating that the sources are unclear due to insufficient inline citations.

Organization: The content added is very minimal but it makes it clear to understand. There doesn't seem to be grammatical errors and the additions seem to be placed in sections that make sense.

Overall impressions: This article seems really well done to me, besides the broken links. The few additions the student made seem helpful to the article and add a little more information than was already there. I would suggest looking over the citations since the reader is notified that there are issues when opening the page.

Kcade1 (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2019 (UTC)Katara Cade