Reviewing with River

I do review non-fiction, but what sort of review I give depends on the subject matter.

If it's a technical document on one of the languages I program in, I can offer corrections to misunderstandings over what the language is doing 'under the hood', because I know about that kinda stuff.

If it's an article about writing, it depends on what it's about. Some things in writing are clearly wrong, such as writing a fifty-page prologue which is nothing more than an info-dump of the main character's life before the story proper begins. If someone tells me that's ok, then I feel happy in telling them otherwise. Other stuff is far more subjective. You have to allow room for a difference of opinion between yourself and the author.

When someone is writing about something I know little or nothing about, then any review I give is going to limited to grammar and syntax suggestions, and possibly suggestions about quoting research material. Sometimes, they may have something very interesting to say, but the structure of their document tends towards the rambling and I might be able to suggest things such as re-ordering things so one thing builds on the previous.