User:Ayanezmarmolejo/Regional styles of Mexican music/Jayhy15 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? Ayanezmarmolejo
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Ayanezmarmolejo/Regional styles of Mexican music

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?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead has not been updated to reflect the new content added by my peer. The lead includes an introductory sentence that seems to be clear describing the article's topic but could be improved. The lead includes a description of the article's major sections since it adds how music varies from states and later talks about each state. The lead doesn't include information that is not present in the article. The lead is not overly detailed, it is very simple.

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?

Content evaluation
The content added is relevant to the topic but needs improvement. The content added is hard to tell if it is up-to-date because there are no references at the end. There is content that is missing when focusing on a particular state.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The content added is neutral. There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position. There are viewpoints that are underrepresented and needs to be improved. The content added doesn't attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position since the article is more about teaching the types of music different states have.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All the content is not backed up by a secondary reliable source. As previously stated there are no sources or reference section so I would say no, the sources are not thorough. The sources are not current and not written by a diverse spectrum of authors since none are available. There are no reference links.

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?

Organization evaluation
The content added is easy to read and clear but needs improvement and more information added. The content added has grammatical errors and needs to be revised. The content added is organized and broken down into sections but more sections can be added.

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?

Images and media evaluation
The article only includes one image at the end and isn't well captioned. There isn't enough images which doesn't make is visually appealing. Definitely needs more images added.

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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
The content added hasn't improved the overall quality of the article. The strengths of the content added is that it is well organized by splitting the states and focusing on each individually. The content can be improved by adding more information, adding images, having up-to-date sources, fixing grammar errors, and possibly adding types of popular songs and/or popular singers since people are interested in knowing information like that.