review_43.md

Practical review

General Comments:

• Interesting content

• Doesn't have a fully cohesive design

• Some pages aren't very detailed

• Varying quality of written presentation

• Varying quality of visual presentation

• Sufficient evidence of collaboration

• Edits at the last minute (forgivable because consistent commits throughout the project)

Interest of content - very good

Content is often unexpected and thus interesting. There is often not much in depths discussion which could be useful to make it more interesting.

Consistency and quality of visual representation - good

A lot of variance and intersting features that keep it exciting. A lack of overall consistancy with some pages being different colours, different sizing of nav bar, very different layouts etc...

Quality of written presentation - good

A lot of variance in the length of the topics discussed, and also the quality in terms of punctuation and readability.

Evidence of collaboration:

Author info - perfect

Balanced contribution - Good

Commits heavily weighted towards Twashi, however everyone seemed to contribute similar amounts within their indvidual webpages

Not completed at the last minute - good

Overall: good