User:ZayMcCoy/One Piece: Pirate Warriors 4/Brandonjohnson2 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? (Brandon Johnson)
• Link to draft you're reviewing: Talk:One Piece: Pirate Warriors 4

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

No the lead wasn't updated to reflect my peer's newly added content .The Lead did include an introductory sentence that described the article's topic in a clear manner.Yes the lead had a brief description but I feel as if it could've been more detailed about the article's major sections.The Lead doesn't include any information that wasn't in the article. The Lead was clear in it's detail but didn't over do it.

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?

Content evaluation

Yes the content that was added was relevant to the topic.The content that was added to this article's page was up to date.I didn't see any content missing from the article during my evaluation

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 tone was informational and stayed neutral throughout the whole article.None of the claims in the article was over exerted in any biases toward any position. The viewpoints in this article stayed based One Piece it didn't overreperesent any point and also didn't underrepresent any key points that were made. None of the added content was added to attempt to persuade any reader in favor pf anything but more so to inform the reader of this particular game and its background.

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?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

The content on this article was backed up by reliable sources of information. The sources that were provided for this article were thorough, and reflected the content that was presented in the article.The sources were up to date and not out-dated. The links I did check worked fine.

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 article's content that was added was clear , and not hard to read. There was no grammar error that I could see and I didn't see any misspellings throughout this article. The content was organized well and nothing was jumbled. The sections were broken down well to reflect the topic points.

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?

Images and media evaluation

The article did include one image that contained the main character from the game which helps understand the game. Yes the image shown was well-captioned.The image that was presented passed all of Wikipedia's copyright regulations.Since the image was only one and wasn't extra it didn't take away in a unappealing way.

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?