User:Alexander cookRCBC/Wireless Emergency Alerts/Wilkens Exavier 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

 * Alexander CookRCBC
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Wireless Emergency Alerts

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The lead ties in some of the content that has been added by the user, but not fully.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead describes Wireless Emergency Alerts clearly and distinctly.
 * 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?
 * The lead mentions the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System, but doesn't not further mention it in the article. Instead, it links it to the page.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * The added content provides relevant information such as versatility and it's policies.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * The content doesn't have any biases and is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The viewpoints of the positive side of wireless emergency alerts are represented fairly. The negative viewpoints of it are more-so underrepresented, potentially due to lack of negative impact. An article referring to the negative side is provided, though.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * It helps showcase why wireless emergency alerts have been so beneficial to society as a whole.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The information provided is backed by multiple references and sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are current and reflect the world as it is today.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The content is very direct and to-the-point.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There are a few grammatical errors. Some punctuational errors as well.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The content is split into several sections and provides clear and relevant information in each.

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
Overall, the content is very clear and simple to read and understand the information. I get the topic and I don't feel lost or confused in reading it whatsoever. What I think the article needs, though, is just more information in regards to the "Uses and Policy" section as well as some more content to the draft overall. The topic you have is very interesting and the references and sources provided are still very recent in the minds of the reader. Be sure to elaborate on the moments in which it helps define both the good and the bad side of Wireless Emergency Alerts. The False Missile Warning is a great article to expand on because it was such a memorable occurrence that happened in the news. Continue to add to the article and I think it well. definitely provide a lot of useful and insightful information to future readers.