User:Arielpaige17/Wattpad/Cquinn1112 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) Arielpaige17
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Wattpad

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The Lead wasn't updated for new information, but already contains most of the important general points of the article.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the introductory sentence sums up the topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The Lead describes most major sections, but leaves out others, including its expansion into other media, and its popular demographics.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? The information in the Lead is found in the entire article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The Lead is concise, giving the important information and describing the topic.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, all content focuses specifically on Wattpad.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? The content is all recent, most from the past 5-10 years.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? All content feels relevant to Wattpad.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? The content appears neutral and doesn't seem to favor or oppose certain points.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, all points seemed unbiased and backed up with reliable sources.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The viewpoints in the article appear to be balanced.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content is only factual and does not attempt to persuade people.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, the sources appeared reliable
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, they focus directly on the topic.
 * Are the sources current? Most sources are current, coming from the past five years.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Linked articles work, but some sources, while naming the article, authors, and source, do not have a link.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is clear and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There were a few grammatical errors in the article, but no spelling errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The article has plenty of sub-sections for all the major points.

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

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, the added content adds to the article's quality.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The added contents shows how the topic can impact its users, and adds information that contributes to the popularity to the site, as well as why people prefer it.
 * How can the content added be improved? The added content can expand on how frequent people tend to receive feedback, and also explain if there are issues regarding non-constructive criticism.