User:Alanis C. Santos Alvira/Gastronomy/CSD2020UPRC 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? Alanis C. Santos Alvira
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Alanis C. Santos Alvira/Gastronomy

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
The Lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. It gives a hint of what is in the article's major section, but I consider it does not describe it directly, so maybe it could add a brief introduction to the history section. In general, I think that the Lead is well developed; the only thing is that if it will have a Puerto Rican Gastronomy section, it has to be added to the Lead section.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
Overall the content is well-develop, related to the topic, and up-to-date. The content added is relevant to the article's topic, but I found that there is already a Wikipedia article that is about this topic, Puerto Rican cuisine. I would not include an entire section of it. If you are going to do it, I recommend you to write about different country gastronomy or cuisine to give an overall of how gastronomy is involved with cultures. Also, if it includes this section could establish a relationship with the underrepresented population. It would be nice if it explains the terms in the Lead as it is theoretical gastronomy, technical gastronomy, and food gastronomy. Even though it is well defined, the article's content could have a brief section explaining what is, how it works, when the terms were created (in the case it was considered in gastronomy as a whole and not in specialties). The article could have a section explaining the different types of gastronomy as the ones mentioned before (those three are already in the article's Lead), and cultivation, nutrition and diet, selection, sustainability, preparation, molecular gastronomy, food pairing, food appreciation, among others.

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 overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
In general, the article is in a neutral tone and does not try to persuade the reader in favor of one position. It does not seem to be overrepresented or underrepresented. There is not a lot added (is a work in progress☺); the editor of the article created the section of what it will develop. However, the copyedit was good and necessary to improve the article's content.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The sources in the article are from different authors; you can also find the reference information of the article's content there. They do work, and most of them are current. I only found one source that does not seem reliable, which I think is more a commercial page than a reliable source. I leave here the source: Garfield, Leanna (12 February 2016). https://www.businessinsider.com/molecular-gastronomy-is-the-future-of-cooking-2016-2 Business Insider. Finally, as the article stipulate, the content needs more precise citations.

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
The article's content is well organized. Even though it has added some grammatical corrections, there are a few things that need to be fixed. I found a few punctuation issues, and the wording of some sentences could be better.

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
The article includes images, and they are according to the topic. Also, all the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulation and are laid out in a visually appealing way. If the editor decides to add the section of different types of gastronomy, it could add some media of it. For example, molecular gastronomy related images or media.

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
Overall I think the article is on a good path. I consider that the biggest strength of it is its structure: definition, history, and details.

Note to editor:

Keep going and I wish you success. ☺♪