User:WikiDiscussion/Black Death/Mdepaz1 Peer Review
Peer review[edit]
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.
General info[edit]
- Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username)
- I a reviewing "Black Death" by: Jellysandwich0
- Link to draft you're reviewing: Black Death
Lead[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
- Yes
- 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?
- It provides a lot of detail
Lead evaluation[edit]
Content[edit]
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?
- No
Content evaluation[edit]
Tone and Balance[edit]
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 not at all
Tone and balance evaluation[edit]
Sources and References[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes
- Are the sources current?
- Yes the sources are recent
- Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes
Sources and references evaluation[edit]
Organization[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- It is well written and well structured to help readers find exactly it is what they are looking for
- 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[edit]
Images and Media[edit]
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Yes and they provide a greater understanding of what you are reading
- Are images well-captioned?
- Yes
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Yes
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- Yes
Images and media evaluation[edit]
For New Articles Only[edit]
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?
- Yes
- How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
- Yes
- 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?
- Yes
- Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
- Yes
New Article Evaluation[edit]
Overall impressions[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
- Yes the article looks nearly perfect and has an array of sources to back up the information
- What are the strengths of the content added?
- It looks very polished and can provide a reader with more information than what they originally came in with
- How can the content added be improved?
- Maybe talking about the present state of "The Black Death"