User:Allie partridge/User:Allie partridge/Capital punishment in Massachusetts/Bellsam4 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? Allie partridge
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Capital punishment in Massachusetts

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the introductory sentence that was updated sounds much more clear and concise.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? While it does offer a brief description, maybe you could add a bit more detail of the major sections that you discuss.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No all is included.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Lead is concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes all content that was added is relevant.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? All is update and could even use more up-to-date examples if available.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is not content that doesn't belong, but perhaps if there has been protests against the death penalty that could add to debate.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Not particularly but it would be interesting to see if capital punishment in Massachusetts does fall heavier on one race, socioeconomic background, than others.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes the content added is of neutral tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Viewpoints are very in the middle but could use even more seeing as it was (is?) a controversial topic.
 * 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 besides the one citation needed after the sentence starting "Nevertheless...".
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes good sources.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, but potentially could include more on the marginalized individuals that it may effect more recently in time (racially?).
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes very much so!
 * 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, the break down of sections was very helpful visually and helps while reading the article.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No images were added, but I think that is perfectly fine when thinking about the nature of the topic.

Overall impressions

 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The content added definitely made the article more complete and easy to understand and read.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The strengths would be how much more relatable it is in the sense of putting it into terms everyone can understand.
 * How can the content added be improved? Potentially looking into if there were an more recent examples of the death penalty and the debate that surrounded that. Still make sure to keep the differing views unbiased, as you have done, put provide another interesting example and what both sides had to say about it.

Overall evaluation:
At the beginning you lay it out in simple terms that the reader has most likely heard before and makes it more understandable by saying "commonly referred to as the death penalty". I really appreciated how you organized the article and broke it up into easy to understand sections rather than one whole body of text. Overall, really great additions to the article with my only advice being add more examples and see if there is a higher rate of capital punishment depending on race. Keep it up!