User:Ahdavis07/The Quadroons (short story)/Nicolerewis 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? Ahdavis07
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Ahdavis07/The Quadroons (short story)

Lead
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
There isn't a lead yet, so when you do create one I'll give a few pointers that I've noticed. When you create one, make sure that it's not just a summary. That's what the summary section is for. I'm only pointing this out because that's something I noticed in my group as well as another group's article. Make sure to add in information from the major sections of your article. So maybe have a little bit reflecting on the background & themes. Stuff like that. :)

Content
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
The content is relevant and everything is up to date as far as I can tell. I think I'd try to add in more information in the Adaptations, Reception, and finish out the Themes. Not much more is really needed. Maybe just go into more detail with the sources you're describing and make sure what you're saying is explained thoroughly. Like when Clotel is mentioned, you could add in a little information describing how it is based on the Quadroons. I'm sure you were going to after we read it, I just figured I'd mention it here as well. :)

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
Quite a neutral article if you ask me. I'd maybe try to cut down the summary a little. The article obviously shows a lot about the abolition movement, but I don't see any bias necessarily. I'd definitely explain a little more about the terms being used like "quadroon" and "tragic mulatto/mulatta" simply because it's nice to link to those articles but you want your reader to be able to use your article to fully understand the work you're talking about. :)

Sources and References
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
All of the sources work, but the ones that link to a page on Galileo require a password to view the source. I'm not sure if thats an issue or if its totally fine, but I thought I'd point it out.

Organization
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
I actually noticed quite a few mistakes in the plot summary section. The content itself is fine, as I said earlier, but there are a few mistakes that are simple to fix. Probably just a case of typing too quickly. I'd also be sure to link to Wikipedia pages throughout that as well. Like when "Octoroon" is mentioned.

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?

Images and media evaluation
N/A

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?

New Article Evaluation
I think overall they should go through and add in some links to Wikipedia articles. Its a super easy way to make your article look legit & be more relevant when someone is researching. I'm noticing a lack specifically in the Background, Plot Summary, Adaptations, and Publication History. Not trying to call you out, just noticing some details that are easy to fix. As for the sources, you did a great job of using sources, but I'd make sure and add a few more. I'm sure these will come with time. Like all of the groups (I've seen), we need to add in some graphics and make sure everything is formatted properly.

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?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
Like I'll say for all of us, there are improvements that could be made. After everything I've mentioned the things that stand out the most to me are the errors in grammar/language throughout the article as well as the lack of Wikipedia links. Both are super easy to fix, and I can understand why they were overlooked. You've got very strong Background, Themes, and Influence. I think you did a great job, just go over it with someone else's eyes so they can fix any mistakes that you could've missed. :)