User:Paola Rios L/Virtual internship/Gustavo.lopez7 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? (Paola Rios L)
• Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Paola Rios L/Virtual internship

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?

Lead evaluation:

• When you read the Lead you will know what is the main topic of this article. It also includes a brief description of what is the main idea of the article. All the information provided in the Lead is present in the article and is very concise.

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?

Content evaluation:

• All the content added in the article is relevant and up-to-date. There´s no information missing or that doesn´t belong to it. The main tone of the article is neutral, it doesn´t talk about underrepresented populations, is nos racist, homophobic, or else.

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?

Tone and balance evaluation:

• The content added to the article is neutral, which means that there are no claims biased toward any position. All the viewpoints are well written in a neutral position.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
• 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?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation:

• All the information provided in the sandbox is backed up by reliable sources, these sources are up-to-date and also they all 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?

Organization evaluation:

• The content added is well-written, it doesn´t have grammatical or spelling errors, and it's well-organized, broken down into different parts.

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?

Overall evaluation:

• The content added in the Sandbox will improve the original article on Wikipedia. This Sandbox writing is neutral, confident, and serious. I need to say that is a great job, keep going in this same way and your Wikipedia article will be improved in a great way.