User:Ayachahine/Said Takieddine/Ss148 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)

AdamHazimeh, Nathaliehr1, Rana Hazimeh


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

User:AdamHazimeh/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the first sentence introduces the Lebanese author, Said Mahmoud Takieddine, which is the center of their article’s topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, there is no description of the article’s major sections. It only briefly introduces who Takieddine is and his role in his society. Only in the “Contents” does it include the sections of the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, everything mentioned in the Lead is later present in the article in more details
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and clearly presents the author in a few sentences

Lead evaluation
The lead describes the author, Said Mahmoud Takkiedidne, by introducing who he is, his employment, and his works. It is clear and straight to the point. It provides the audience with a good understanding of what the article is about. However, it does not include a brief description of the sections in the article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it is a general bibliography including specific information on Said Takieddine.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Taking into consideration that the resources must be extremely credible and based solely on facts, the content provided is as recent as it can be while remaining accurate.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, all information was well placed and gave slight introduction into the paragraph to come after.

Content evaluation
The content is clear and straight-forward. There is no excessive information regarding any topic, however some sections seem that there is more information that can be added, this is due to lack of credible resources and websites. The general content is well-sufficient and provides the right ideas on the topic at hand.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There are a few sections that are more detailed than others, however this most likely is not due to any biases, but instead because of more availability of credible information.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, it is clear and states facts without attempt to persuade.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone and balance remain neutral throughout the entirety of the text, which is what is expected. All sections are given approximately the same amount of attention except the sections which contain only one sentence (this is understandable). The general tone from the text is what is expected from any informative Wikipedia article.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, they are very depictive of what resources are available and they provide the right amount of information on each topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are mostly from the early 2010s.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
There are many sources and references, all of which are credible and reliable. After checking many links, they all work and they all provide direct information without the intention to persuade a reader through confirmation bias.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the content is well written and the language is clear and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * The article does not have any spelling errors, but I did find a few grammatical and sentence structure errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, the article is well organized. It is easy to follow as the article includes headings and subheadings which describes what the section is about.

Organization evaluation
The article is well organized and easy to follow. It is divided into sections by paragraphs, headings, and subheadings. The article also includes a content box which allows the audience to explore the different sections.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, there are three images in the article. The first is an image of the author, and the other two are images of descriptions of two of his works.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, each image has a caption that concisely describes it.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, the images are cited and follow Wikipedia’s copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, the picture of the author is next in the content box near the Lead. The other two images are to the right of the relevant text.

Images and media evaluation
The use of images was relevant to the article’s topic. They were all laid out neatly and is not distracting. They are also all well-captioned and cited.

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 is supported by reliable secondary sources. Some of the sources included published books that wrote about the writer's life and his works.


 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?

There were 3 sources that were used to the cite the information found in the article. These sources included information about the writer's personal life and some of his works.


 * 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?

The article follows the layout of other Wikipedia articles. It does include an info box as well as some section heading along with their subheadings. The article includes some images as well in addition to their captions that briefly describe what the image entails.


 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

The article includes many links to other Wikipedia pages (e.g. American University of Beirut, Bachelor of Degree, etc.) which makes the article more interesting when reading it.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * The article now includes many new sections and information that allows the reader to gain a more detailed perspective on the life of Said Mahmoud Takkiedidne. Additionally, the information is clearly organized into sections that improves the overall quality of the article and makes it easier for the reader to find what they are looking for.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The content added included details that were not previously found online about the author. This article gave Said Mahmoud Takkiedidne an online presence where people can now more about his life and his work through a reliable source.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * The strength of the article may be improved by adding more details concerning his personal life or his work.