User:Apple1223/AirPods/Yjh5146 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

 * Apple1223
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: AirPods

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead include an introductory sentence that describe the article's topic concisely and clearly.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead did not cover a brief descripitopn of the article major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * All the information that present in the article are all well presented in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is in an apporporiate length did not present too much detail.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * The content states at a neutral way.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The content of this article states at a neutral position and did not have a heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * All the viewpoints have been represented aporpriate.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The content states in a neutral way did nor try to lead readers to a specific position.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * All the sourece are backup by a reliable secondary source and information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * All the source that used in the article are available to the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are current and available.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * The sources that this article used are diverse and from different authors.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links that are checked are all available.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. 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?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

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?
 * The article has 2-3 reliable sources that are indpedent of the subjects.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * It is accurately represent all available literatere on the subject.
 * 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?
 * This articel includes the section heading which is unique to this article.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * The article used the link to another article however it just help this article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


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