User:Panellmi6154/Victorian era/Tynenmj9041 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? (provide username) Panellmi6154
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Panellmi6154/sandbox

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes it is clear and shows what they did.
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Topic is already chosen.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No but just highlights on prostitution.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Not sure.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise and to the point.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes they expanded on the topic prostitution.
• Is the content added up-to-date? Yes they added more relevant information to make it more up to date.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? All information seemed to belong and was accurate.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? Yes it doesn't take a certain side.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Nope the information is neutral.
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it does not at all.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes it is.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? They seem to be however I do not see link to check them.
• Are the sources current? N/A
• Check a few links. Do they work? There are not links to their sources.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes it is quite clear the author added lots of information.
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, everything seemed grammatically correct to me.
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes it was well organized and structured to the point, they elaborated on prostitution and went further into depth.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
• Are images well-captioned? N/A
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

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?