User:Allaboutarticles/Media corruption/Newwriter007 Peer Review

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?

Yes ,the lead gives the overall view of the article and its content


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes,it does include a proper introductory sentence that highlights the content of the article.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

It doesnt include that the article is mainly focused on the media corruption in middle east


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

No


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

It is short and to the point.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?

Yes


 * Is the content added up-to-date?

Everything is up to date,the content is only 2-3 years old. One of the source is from a while back but it discuss the history of the situation.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

No


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

Media corruption in the Middle East addresses a region which often under represented. Along with that media corruption during  the Syrian War is not mentioned properly in the wikipedia.Thus adding an article about it enables readers to know more about the topic

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?

Yes, it is not one sided and does not include any personal preferences.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

No


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

No, the entire article objectively shows the corruption in the media

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?

2 of the sources cited are only 2-3 years old. One of the sources dates back to 2004 however it discusses the history of the Syrian War and media involvement


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

Yes, the authors are diverse


 * 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.)
 * https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-science-research-and-methods/article/abs/authoritarian-media-and-diversionary-threats-lessons-from-30-years-of-syrian-state-discourse/2CAB19CFAD58B5E2F2E44EDDFA0F68D4


 * 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?

Yes


 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?

No


 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Yes

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?

Yes


 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?

Yes


 * 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?

No, this is the first article that talks about the media corruption in Syria


 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

No

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?

Yes, since there is not much information about this topic across wikipedia. The added content improves the overall quality.


 * What are the strengths of the content added?


 * 1) The content provides clear examples, such as the Syrian Civil War, making it easier to understand the impact of media corruption.
 * 2) By highlighting specific cases like the Syrian Civil War, readers can see how media corruption affects significant events.
 * 3) The content directly addresses media corruption in the Middle East, aligning well with the article's theme.


 * How can the content added be improved?

The article doesn't follow the Wikipedia alignment. Adding the heading for references

And making the sub headings proper.

General info
Allaboutarticles
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Allaboutarticles/Media_corruption?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template