User:Acho98/Bite of Seattle/Bonnie Weglin 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? Ancho98
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Acho98/Bite of Seattle

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? yes, some information has been trimmed to make it more concise.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, topic is clearly presented
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, but the following sections elaborate on the lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Lead is concise and easy to follow

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, content is all relevant and covers different aspects of the festival.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Content seems up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Food and drink content seems to be considered as something to add, maybe still gathering information?

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes content seems neutral, informative but not opinionated.
 * 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? Seems neutral, the accomplishments category elevates the prestige of the festival but it doesn't attempt to convince of anything - free of persuasion.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? There is secondary source information, mainly journals and newspapers - good sources. But some links must be copied/pasted instead of click-able in the reference category.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes sources are thorough
 * Are the sources current? Mostly
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Some links only lead to general websites instead of specific pages containing the information - #1 under references just leads to Seattle times main page.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, well written and easy to digest.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? None apparent
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, the organization makes the paragraph topics clear.

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?

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? Article seems almost complete, so far so good.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Including the accomplishment category was a good addition, solidifies the festival as significant. The features related to the music/performance aspect were good as well.
 * How can the content added be improved? I think adding to the food/drink category would be beneficial.