User:Allyreagle/Maple Syrup Urine Disease/Juliannar9887 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? Alexandra Reagle
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Maple syrup urine disease

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the lead has been updated to reflect the new content added by my peer.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic;.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?Yes, this lead does include a brief description of the article's major sections which are sign and symptoms, history, etc.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise and very well written.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, the content added is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Ys, the content is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yees, the tone is neutral and not biased.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, every topic was spoken about enough and with detail.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content is not biased.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, there are multiple secondary sources of information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, they are current and up to date.
 * 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, it is written concise, clear, and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, there are no grammatical errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, all broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, there are two very descriptive and informative images in the article.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, they are.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, they do.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, they are.

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? N/A
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? N/A
 * 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? N/A
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? N/A

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, the content has improved and is complete.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The strengths of the content that were added were thee images and sources.
 * How can the content added be improved? N/A