User:Amb8675/Throw-away society/Henny2shoes 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? (Amb8675)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Amb8675/Throw-away society

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes the lead has been updated
 * Does the Lead 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?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the content is relevant because it focuses on consumption
 * Is the content added up-to-date? By up to date do you mean recently? If so, no because it uses a historical approach.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No there's not any content that doesn't belong.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes I feel like this article addresses underrepresented populations such as women in a certain era. I think it does deal with one of the equity gaps because it speaks about the impact of women.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? I feel like the content added was neutral because it just gave facts about what women did in this era.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I won't say it leans heavily towards a particular person but it does speak a lot about a certain group.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No there are not
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content is simply giving information about women which seems fine

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes it is backed up by very reliable books such as one we are using in our class.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they do reflect it, for example the book by cohen is known for its stance on women which is a very reliable source to use for this article.
 * Are the sources current? They are current as of the latest being 1967 and the most current being 2003
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes they are written by about 5 authors. Yes they include a woman and some minorities.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they do

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes it is very easy to read and free following.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not a lot of errors, barely any if anything.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes I really like how the content is organized with headers and the structure.

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
 * Are images well-captioned? No images
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There are no images
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No images

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 it even included 3 extra sources
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Yes it does
 * 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
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes, it links to various keywords used in the article

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? I feel like a little bit more information could be included to these sections to complete the whole article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? One strength I discovered was how well the article flowed when reading it, the fact the article provided information about women with the free following format made it easier to read.
 * How can the content added be improved? It be be improved by adding pictures and more personal stories about these heroic women.

Overall evaluation
Does your peer have 5-7 reliable sources? Yes the article provides 5 sources that are very reliable

Is at least one of them a source from class reading or the "suggested sources" list? The article uses the main book that we are using in class which is Elizabeth Cohen's "A consumers republic".

Does the topic link in some way to our course material? The topic does link into our course material because it discusses the involvement of women in the consumption era.

Does your peer add historical context to their article? Yes, she uses examples from the war specifically to explain the circumstances

Based on what you know from course content, what do you think Wikipedia users should know about this topic? In other words, what would you recommend adding and/or considering further? I think Wikipedia should know the importance of women during this time and this article does an amazing job.