User:Ayaide/Nintendo thumb/Ngutierrez3 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username)


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Question 1) Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wikipedia peer review “Guiding framework”?

Yes, the edits added substantially improve the article. They have filled in the gaps about what Nintendo thumb is and how it is caused. It also includes a timeline of when the first case was found since Nintendo consoles have been around for a while now. There were also other gaming related injuries that were included as well such as the Wii-itis and PlayStation thumb. The lead section is easy to understand and lays out the framework well for the article, the only thing that could be added is when Nintendo consoles where first made. The article is well balanced as well, no one section is larger than the other. It also is written from a neutral point of view since the article is just giving details about Nintendo thumb and other related injuries. All the content is up to date and relevant to current gaming related injuries as well as the main topic of the article. There are secondary sources backing all new content and the sources are current. The images added are consistent with the topic and add a visual for the gaming related injury. This article does link to other articles so it can be easier to find.

Question 2) Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement?

The group has achieved its overall goal for improvements. It is a well written article sharing multiple sources, different injuries related to the main topic, and is well balanced. I would maybe try to add some information about the WII related injuries at the beginning of the article since it is a larger topic in your article.

Question 3) Are the edits formatted consistent with Wikipedia’s manual of style?

The articles edits are formatted consistently with Wikipedia's manual of style. There are no headers left without any information under it, the contents of their article are formatted in an easy way to follow, and they have multiple different sources to added strength to the information they wrote about.