User:Beril gur/Political Polarization in Turkey/RiaVora 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)
 * Beril gur
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Beril gur/sandbox

Lead evaluation
Since the drafts haven't been incorporated into articles yet, there aren't any lead suggestions to make :) This article is a new article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it concerns the history and definition of political polarization in Turkey, and a timeline leading up to now
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, for the reason stated above
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * All content belongs, but obviously there is room to expand on influential figures in Turkey and dive deeper into the timeline
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No, but it deals with a topic of conflict

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, this is one of the most neutral articles I have read so far!
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, the view is standard and explanatory
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, it just explains how the political polarization in Turkey has existed

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The sources seem reliable, although it is difficult to tell if they are secondary
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources seem to be diverse and extensive, and they seem to cover a good portion of views on the topic
 * Are the sources current?
 * Some sources are from 2020, but others are from 2014 (since she is describing the history of political polarization). One source that she uses quite a lot, however, from Somer, Murat, does not have a date.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Many of the sources seem to be written by Turkish individuals, representing their view
 * 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?
 * Yes!
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, just a few citation and spacing errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The sections are organized in a clear way, but many sources are repeated with a different citation number (for example, citation 15, 16, and 17, are the same) so I would highly recommend using the same citation number when referencing that source

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?
 * Yes, the article is supported by 2 - 3 reliable secondary sources from the sources she found
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * The sources are fairly diverse and seem to cover a lot of literature from reliable sources concerning the topic
 * 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?
 * Yes! It mimics other history articles with a timeline
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * Yes

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes, with this addition, the new article will add this information to the Wikipedia database
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The language used is very strong, neutral, and well-explained. The content structure is well-organized
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Citations could be merged and more emphasis could be put on the future parts of the timeline relating to now, as well as important figures