User:Allysonpark/Sociology of sport/Hannahmcneal Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username) Allyson park
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Allysonpark/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * No it has not been updated.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * No, it does not include the emotions involved in the sociology of sports.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No it does not include the main sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, it does not include the added emotion of sports, which was included by the editor in her sandbox.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is very concise, maybe too much that it does not include enough information on the topic.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content added is relevant to the topic sociology of sport. The content added was about emotion in sports. Emotions in sports can play a big role in performance in both athletes and spectators.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content added is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is no content that does not belong, however, there should be more information on the different types of emotions an athlete can experience. There can also be more information on how these emotions can affect their performances.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes the content added is neutral for there is no bias added to her references.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, the editor did a good job writing unbiased work. She helps to develop to develop the position that there is a good amount of emotion involved in playing sports.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The editor does a good job in touching on both the sports players as well as the surrounding individuals that help to make the game the way it is including the referees, sports commentators, and the coaching staff, etc.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The content added helps to persuade the reader that the field of sports is not just about “manliness” which is typically associated with not having emotion.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Her information is not very reliable seeing that the sources come from a site that does not have .edu or .gov at the end of the website link. Also, when the links were opened to the website itself there was a multitude of ads that did not apply to the topic at hand. However, the sources do cite their references to the topic which helps to make it more reliable.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are thorough and they provide good information on the topic. However, it is not a scholarly source that is completely reliable.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes the sources are current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Both of her sources work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the content added was well-written. It was written in a way that is easy to understand. It is concise and clear so that all varying age groups can comprehend it.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No the content does not have any grammatical or spelling errors. Grammar such as spelling and commas are in the places that are necessary.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The content added is well-organized. The first paragraph explains how emotions are important to an athlete's performance. The second paragraph explains how emotions differ.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation

 * Peers did not add any images or media to the article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes, I think the content added improved the overall quality of the article. Emotions are an important aspect and play a big role in the performance of sports. The article doesn’t mention anything about emotions so I think it definitely improved the quality of this article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The strengths of the content added are the examples that she gave to show how negative emotions impact the athlete. Shs gave an example of how stage fright  or nervousness can impact the performance in their sport.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I think the content can be improved by briefly explaining the most common different emotions that an athlete can experience. I think the content can also be improved by adding images or media.