Talk:Osmeivy Ortega Pacheco

Untitled
Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? It has been maybe a good two weeks since any changes by the lead. The site seems to be incomplete so hopefully soon there will be more contented added. Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The topic sentence was very direct regarding who this person is, birth place as well as what they detail on what they do as a career. Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? There is a section where it tells what the main idea of the sections of the wiki page will be about. There is no description in sentence form just in subtopic titles. Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Content seems to be concise. There is no ranting or changing topics that are not relevant to the subject at hand. Guiding questions:

Is the content added relevant to the topic? The information stated is relevant to the topic from education, types of art and what his work is. Is the content added up-to-date? The content is within a good time frame to still be relevent. Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The only missing content is the information in the subsections that are not filled in yet. Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? This topic is representing underrepresented artists of a large variety from ethnicity as well as just not being a household name. Tone and Balance Guiding questions:

Is the content added neutral? There is no bias nor opinions on this page. It was all short and direct to the point. Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I would personally have enjoyed more detailed regarding his artwork but this is not meant to be an analyzes of the work so maybe instead just do a small description or what the piece is? That is if there is not clashing with the assignments rules. Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? There is no opinions or persuasion in the assignment. Sources and References Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The sources used for the information was accurate as well as reliable choices. I feel the only cite that was hesitant is the pinterest link. Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) I looked over the detailed in both this page as well as the sources, nothing appeared to be copied word for word and were also accurate in what the content says. Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources all either has similar information as in regards to the artist as a person and what he does. The smaller changes were in what art work they had something to say. Are the sources current? The farthest source I found was one from 2013 but even then it is still current enough for information due to most work should be in a 10 year span time frame. Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The majority of the spectrum was the child's gallery or sites that just spoke regarding art.

Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

After some digging I discovered the same sources from first glance as the writer. The only was to maybe discover new information is to read deep into the articles to maybe from a trail of new information. Check a few links. Do they work? All links provided did work. Organization Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It was very easy to read, there was no confusion in what was being said. Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I saw no errors.

Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? There is very specific topics and points made that made finding the information really easy. Images and Media Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? no images present Are images well-captioned? no images provided so no response Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?. Not applicable Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? not applicable For New Articles Only If the draft you're reviewing is for 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? there is sufficient number of secondary sources.

How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? There is only four sources, it does not due there still needs work in the collections and awards sections.

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? There is no infoboxes, but there are section headings. 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? It is very direct and lacks any opinions. How can the content added be improved? I feel there should be more organization in the artworks section. In your introduction there is also words that can be defined for people like lithographs. If you need more information explain what his techniques are like what is woodblock prints. Or maybe an up to date as if he still teaches.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 14 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Egarciaart.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)