User:Zoedescoteaux/Early Quranic manuscripts/Jvaughan219 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)
- Link to draft you're reviewing:
Lead[edit]
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[edit]
Content[edit]
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[edit]
Tone and Balance[edit]
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[edit]
Sources and References[edit]
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[edit]
Organization[edit]
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[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?
- 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[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?
- 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?
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?
- What are the strengths of the content added?
- How can the content added be improved?
Overall evaluation[edit]
My Answers
General info[edit]
Lead[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Yes it has.
- Yes it does.
- DoYes it does
- No it does not
- The lead is concise?
Lead evaluation[edit]
Content[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Yes it is?
- I can only tell by the sources but yes there are.
- Yes, but I assume his article isn't all the way finished.
Content evaluation[edit]
Tone and Balance[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Yes the content is neutral.
- No, everything is factally based.
- No viewpoints are over-represented in or under-represented
- No it does not.
Tone and balance evaluation[edit]
Sources and References[edit]
Guiding questions:
- Yes all the content is backed by reliable sources.
- Yes the sources are thorough.
- Yes the sources are current.
- I checked the links, yes they all work.
Sources and references evaluation[edit]
Organization[edit]
Guiding questions:
- The article is well written and easy to understand.
- I see no spelling or grammatical errors that I can tell.
- The content and organized by subject which is easy for the readers to understand.
Organization evaluation[edit]
Images and Media[edit]
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media
- Yes it does.
- No they are not.
- I think so.
- damages are laid out in a visually pleasing and easy to understand organi