User:BGarrett333/Aromatherapy/Roopeterson 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) Barbara Garrett- B Garrett
 * Link to draft you're reviewinghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BGarrett333/Aromatherapy/Roopeterson_Peer_Review?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_peer_review :

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?no
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?yes

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? underrepresented
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

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
 * Are the sources current?yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?yes

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?no
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? no
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?no

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media- no images


 * 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
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It can transition smoothly in the article and can be opened to new information without having to change a lot
 * How can the content added be improved? The content can have a more neutral tone.

Overall evaluation
Overall the information is good however more can be added. I feel like its the type of therapy could be useful, the more information that can be added the more it could be used to help people.