User:Adriel824/Nike Blazers/Aliyahm 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? Adriel824
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Adriel824/Nike Blazers

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead has plenty of content that gives an overview of what the article topic is.
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The first sentence clearly describes what the article will be about.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? I think the lead could allude to the upcoming sections, Nike SB and collaborations.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Content is relevant to topic.
• Is the content added up-to-date? Content is up to date and includes historical background of the topic.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? The content is written in a neutral tone.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Bias is not present in the article.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The content is stated objectively without a persuasive tone.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, the article's content all includes plenty of internal links to references.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
• Are the sources current? Sources are current and relevant.
• Check a few links. Do they work? Links work.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is easy to read.
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I don't notice any grammar/spelling errors.
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The Nike SB section is pretty short, maybe more information could be added or it could be renamed and combined with some of the content from the lead.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? The image already in the article does enhance it, but I think that it might enhance the article even more to add images of the shoes for each of the different collaborations that are listed in the collaborations section.
• Are images well-captioned? Yes.
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

For New Articles Only

If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.

• Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
• How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
• Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
• What are the strengths of the content added?
• How can the content added be improved?