User:Alexdasilva47/Park Effects/Haowen Wan 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? (provide username) Alexdasilva47
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Alexdasilva47/Park Effects

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the lead has shown the latest content added by my peer
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead have a introductory sentence of introducing the park effect, and clearly describes the park effect to the reader.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, there is a brief introduction of the park effects which shows how stadiums influences the outcome of game
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, the lead includes all the information present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise, it talks about a brief introduction of park effects.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, the content includes the formula, the rank, and park effects used in other leagues.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, all the information in content is latest.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think the content is pretty completed.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes, because the article talks about a new statistic that never be added in wikipedia.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, the author use a neutral tone to write the content, and no bias at all.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, the article generally introduces the park effects and there is not any claims that appear heavily bias
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, i think the author did a great job of planning each section which have enough words to illustrate the information of park effects.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The content attempt to persuade the reader in favor or one position, the author generally talks about how to calculate park effects and the implication of park effects to each leagues

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all the content are based on reliable resources
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I think sources are enough for literatures on topic, it give the reliable resource of park effetcs.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, all the sources are published in recent years.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, there are some sources written by diverse spectrums of authors from different website, basketballvmi.com, FanGraphs Baseball and etc.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The source work when i check.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the content firstly introduces the formula and then the ranks of high park effects. lastly it talks about the park effects used in other leagues.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? The content is error free.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, all the content is related to park effects, includes the formula, the rank and the implication in other league.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No, the picture are showing the stadium.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, the two images adhere to the copyright regulations
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No, because the images is the regular picture of two stadiums.

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, there are more reliable sources that list by the author.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Yes, every section is based on at least one reliable source
 * 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, the article contains necessary infoboxes, and section headings of ranks, formula, implications.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? The article don't link to others, it should improve later

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The content of article includes every detail of park effects, and each section of content have a good quality.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? One of the strengths of content would be every section are based on a reliable resource, secondly, all the content illustrates the park effect enough includes how it was calculated, the present rank of stadiums
 * How can the content added be improved? i think the only way of improving would be the images to article

Overall evaluation
The author did a great job of lead which includes a brief introduction of park effects, the lead is concise. The content includes every detail of park effects. The math formula, the ranks of stadiums and implications of park effects in other league. A well-organized article, however i think the images would need to improve.