User talk:Luliloisel/New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival/RAY of the SEA Peer Review

This peer review is based on original article Questions are based on Wikipedia peer review training

1 First, what does the article do well? Good photos 2. Is there anything from your review that impressed you? no 3. Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival 4. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? More focused subtopics 5. Why would those changes be an improvement? Food, crafts, and attractions should be in there on subsections for understanding and importance. 6. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? Stages and tents subsection makes no sense 7. A lead section that is easy to understand? Yes 8. A clear structure? no 9. Balanced coverage? No 10.Neutral content? no 11.Reliable sources? no 12.Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic? No 13. Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information? No 14. Does the lead give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Yes, History 15. Is anything missing? What type of music each tent represents. 16. Is anything redundant? no 17. Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? No 18.Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? No 19. Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? no Is anything off-topic? no 20. Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? no 21. Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing? yes 22. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? no 23. Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? no 24. Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? no 25.Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? no 26.Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? No

27. Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? no 28. do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? no Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? no 29. Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references?NO RAY of the SEA (talk) 18:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. I would love for you to go back to the article and reread it since your review was posted before we made any changes as a group.Whodatmom (talk) 01:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC) Tha

Yes, I agree with Silvia. If you are willing I would love to see what your thoughts are after our edits. Thank you for your time! Luliloisel (talk) 18:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)