User:Aliwood08/Lyric Atchison/Diogo Martins Peixoto 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? Ali Wood.
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Aliwood08/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes. The lead presents new relevant content.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? No. I believe the text needs another chronological order in order to be more direct, but all the information for a great lead was collected.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No. The article is in construction.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No. It presents information that is shown in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I believe it could be more concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes. There is a lot of information that covers in-depth the character.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, since the facts presented in the text are recent.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I believe all the content presented so far has great relevance to the topic. At the same time, some details are missing (birth date and what she is studying at UBC are two examples).

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes. The content just describes the character's achievements without unnecessary use of adjectives.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No at all. The text tone is neutral.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No. The text just describes facts in a balanced way.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No. Only facts are presented from a neutral perspective.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The article uses six sources from reliable sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes. Nonetheless, the literature on the topic is restricted since the article is about a young person.
 * Are the sources current? Yes. All the facts are recent.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they do. However, one of them requested my university login.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? In my humble opinion, the text is concise, but it needs to be more objective.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I have not found any grammatical issues.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? So far, the article has two sections. I believe Ali has enough content to produce add more sections to her article. This would be helpful to present the article in a more concise way.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There is no image.
 * Are images well-captioned? There is no image.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There is no image.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There is no image.

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. The article presents six reliable secondary sources.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? I believe so. The article is about a young athlete. For that reason, I would say there are not many sources available.
 * 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. It has some features presented in other Wikipedia articles.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? So far, there is no link to other articles.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The article is new and helps to disseminate knowledge about outstanding Indigenous athletes.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The article has the function to inform the public about the achievements and the culture of Canadian Indigenous athletes. It also presents relevant information about the athlete.
 * How can the content added be improved? From my point of view, the creation of new sections and connections would bring more organization to the article. As a consequence, the text would be more direct.