User:Ezekebetito/History of basketball/KarimMassarani Peer Review

Peer review

Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects:

Lead

Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
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?
Is the content added up-to-date?
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

Is the content added neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
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?

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Are the sources current?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
Are images well-captioned?
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 for 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?

Examples of good feedback

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Peer review of "Homemaking"
Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Additional Resources

Check out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions.

General info

Whose work are you reviewing?

Ezebe Betito

Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ezekebetito/History_of_basketball?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): History of basketball

Evaluate the drafted changes

Content: The content Zeke is planning to add to his article is completely relevant to the topic. Zeke is talking about Olympic basketball history in a "History of Basketball" Wikipedia article, which totally makes sense. The content Zeke is adding does not need to be up-to-date as it is about Olympic basketball history. There is no missing content or content that should not belong in the "History of Basketball" Wikipedia article. This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps

Tone and Balance: The content added is definitely neutral. However, I would recommend Zeke to talk about the Olympic history of certain teams other than the United States in order to be as unbiased as possible. There are no viewpoints that are over represented or under represented, and the content does not attempt to persuade the reader.

Sources and References: The new content does seem to be backed up by a reliable source of secondary information. However, from the second sentence of the first paragraph to the fifth sentence of the second paragraph there are no citations, leading me to assume that all this information is from the second source listed in the Bibliography which is the American hoops book. If that is not the case, then remember to always cite your source after you make a certain point. I remember that one of the Wikipedia lessons said that you should generally cite a source after every 1-2 sentences, so keep that in mind. The sources are all thorough, current, and very reliable. One of the sources is the website of the Olympics which is a great source to use if you are talking about the Olympics, and the two other sources are books written about basketball. The links do indeed work.

Organization: The content is well-structured, clear, and very easy to read. However, there are a few grammatical errors that need to be fixed. I will help you by pointing out that you used the word it's incorrectly. Remember that "it's" with an apostrophe means it is. The content is divided into separate paragraphs and well-organized

Overall Impressions: The content Zeke wants to add will definitely improve the quality of the article by making it more thorough and complete. Zeke made a great decision by choosing to talk about Olympic basketball history in a "Basketball History" article. Zeke also used great sources that are very reliable and relevant to his topic and the content he wants to add is very detailed and informative. However, the content can be improved by fixing the grammatical errors and by citing your sources after every point that you make. Right now, I am a little bit confused as to where you got some of your information from because you went over one paragraph without citing a source. Overall, you did a great job and I wish you the best of luck with editing your article