User:"psithurism311"/Storyville, New Orleans/Unojlpetkov Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

"psithurism311"/Storyville, New Orleans


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%22psithurism311%22/Storyville,_New_Orleans?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? It doesn't look like it
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? No
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, but I do believe more information should be added
 * Is the content added up-to-date? No, the information seems to be from when the project first started
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? All the information that is given is on topic and gives the right information
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No, this topic is mainly about music and how it made Storyville in New Orleans

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, everything is going in the same direction
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Yes, there is some information that is underrepresented, needs more sources to be able to learn more on the topic
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The information given allows me to one opinion and not push me away from the subject

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Most of the sources are from 2021 so they are current
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, they have many different types of sources and authors for their sources
 * 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.) Yes one in particular is, https://gonola.com/things-to-do-in-new-orleans/arts-culture/nola-history-the-legendary-storyville-district
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes all the links work

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Everything that is provided is very easy to read, just needs more information
 * 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, it is

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned? No, only because there are no images
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?No, only because there are no images
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?No, only because there are no images

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? Yes it is
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? It is in the middle of having an exhaustive list and still needing some work. The sources that are provided does represent all available literature
 * 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

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? With the information I have suggested, I do believe would help the article out a little bit more
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Another reliable source
 * How can the content added be improved? Yes the contact added can be improved