User:Amh285/Maya death rituals/DeathOnArrakis 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? (provide username)
 * Amh285
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * N/A

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * No.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is perhaps too concise.

Lead evaluation
The lead seems to be very lacking. It only contains three sentences which do not properly reflect the information in the article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, there does not appear to be any irrelevant information.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I believe that there is definitely information missing. Perhaps not from the presented topics, but rather the article as a whole.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The current content seems to generally be decent. There are many opportunities for new information in the form of other sections to be added to the article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * The content is neutral.
 * 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, it is purely informative.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone and balance are very good. There does not appear to be any bias or over/underrepresentation affecting the article.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? No.
 * Are the sources current? For the most part.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? There was only one unique direct link to an article, it works.

Sources and references evaluation
There are not too many sources. A large amount of them come from the same encyclopedia. Multiple paragraphs do not contain any references.

Organization
Guiding questions: (No content added)


 * 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?
 * I noticed once grammatical error where a space is missing after a period in the second Customs paragraph.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, it is well organized.

Organization evaluation
Overall, the organization of this article is decent. The Customs section could use some work, as there is just a large block of text that may be difficult to get through. It could be reformatted to better explain the process.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media (No images or media were added)


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes.

Images and media evaluation
There are only two images in this article. I feel that the article could be improved by added more, such images of Mayan tombs in the Tomb section or images to accent the Customs section.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? N/A
 * What are the strengths of the content added? N/A
 * How can the content added be improved? N?A

Overall evaluation
Overall, this appears to be a decent article. However it is lacking in several areas. The lead is only three sentences and can be expanded upon to touch on more of the content in the article. There are barely an images and I feel that it would benefit from having a few more. There are four major sections, but I cannot help but feel that there is content missing there. Many of the references come from the same few sources. Adding more sources to backup claims and present some slightly more recent information would greatly improve the article.