User:Alipetrone/Dekulakization/Gnando Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Alipetrone


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alipetrone/Dekulakization?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Dekulakization

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The lead has been updated, but it may actually not be concise and have all of the most interesting parts of "Dekulakization" presented first -- not really following upside down pyramid method
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * No, it should describe dekulakization, not Kulaks themselves. Maybe something like "Dekulakization was the process of..."
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Overly detailed

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * 100%, Ali gets into a lot of the Stalin/Lenin dynamics with Dekulakization
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * I believe so?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Not really no
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes, dekulakization is definitely a lowkey topic

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes but your tone seems a little bit unencyclopedic when talking about Stalin and Lenin and their motivations
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * It seems to be slightly biased against Stalin (everything in the article is completely legitimate but definitely an anti-Stalin vibe)
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Ali does a great job going over all topics of Dekulakization
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * No
 * 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?
 * It could definitely be more concise and encyclopedic
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I can see
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The sections are good but the content is a little bit all over the place

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for 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
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes definitely goes over a much broader range of topics of dekulakization
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Just much more expansive
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Mostly the tone - more encyclopedic - and the length, could be more concise.