User:Adriel824/Nike Blazers/Afosorno 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? Adriel824
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Adriel824/Nike Blazers

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes
 * 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? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? When looking at the lead, it is 2 paragraphs and 8 sentences long. It feels like too much information for a lead since it goes into the history of the shoe, how it is made, and some facts about the shoe. I think that the lead should be more concise and to the point about the article topic and some of the information in the lead can be used to create another category of content in the article about its history.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, the inclusion of the recent collaborations that the Nike Blazer has made is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think it could be a good idea to go into more detail about the famous athletes that have a history with Nike Blazers.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Overall yes, though it sometimes tends to be overly excited about the style of shoe or the other brands that have been used in a collaboration.
 * 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? No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The last collaboration content about Nike Blazer and Sacai does not have a link with a reliable source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Overall yes, but one link under "fat buddha" shows up as missing.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

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? Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? It is a lot of links to sites selling the shoes, I think it needs more articles about the history of the shoe or history/reason for the collaborations.
 * 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? Yes definitely, it has way more information now.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? I think there can be more content added but so far very strong.
 * How can the content added be improved? more information about collaboration with athletes or about how the shoe was first received would be beneficial