User:Benjamin Charles Baird/Off-speed pitch/Kathylamb7 Peer Review

Peer review

General info

• Whose work are you reviewing? Benjamin Charles Baird
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Benjamin Charles Baird/Off-speed pitch

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
  • No, but new sections are added
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
  • Yes
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
  • Yes
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
  • No
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • Pretty concise, gives an overall idea of what an off-speed pitch is to someone who isn't familiar with baseball

Lead evaluation

Overall solid, if there was a historical aspect, like when the name was coined, that would be pretty solid to add

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic?
  • Yes
• Is the content added up-to-date?
  • Yes
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • Possibly a historical section (if applicable), notable players who may be "known" for it, videos of it (if it adheres to copyright)
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
  • N/A

Content evaluation

Overall solid, could add some information but it might not be available

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral?
  • Yes
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
  • No
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
  • No
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
  • No

Tone and balance evaluation

Solid.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
  • Yes
  • Slider reference--may be seen as biased, another resource might be better
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
  • Yes
• Are the sources current?
  • Yes
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
  • Somewhat, 2 sources by Steven Ellis--may be seen as biased
• Check a few links. Do they work?
  • Yes

Sources and references evaluation

Overall solid, sources might be replaced by other editors

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
  • Yes
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
  • No
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
  • Yes

Organization evaluation

Solid

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
  • Yes
• What are the strengths of the content added?
  • More detail on overarching categories of an off-speed pitch
• How can the content added be improved?
  • Potentially finding alternative sources, adding media (if possible)

Overall evaluation

Really great contributions! I know little-to-nothing about baseball and I feel like everything was clear. It might help to have visual references to support the depth of detail you provide but great additions so far :)