User:Birnbryer20/Call-out culture/Dcm829 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? Birnbryer20
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Birnbryer20/Call-out culture

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes. Reference to Ethan M. Huffman's thesis is referenced in the lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It could be more precise by using the term "online shaming" in the lead. However, there is a suggestion to merge the page with online shaming.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not yet.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes. It specifically discusses celebrities but does not present that information later in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is primarily a definition of call-out culture and could afford to have a more concise definition and expanded information about its importance and why it can be harmful.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yess
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? A dedicated section on its origins as a method for Black femmes to stop social media harassment would with additional information about the Black femmes and the year it began.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No. It is very neutral.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No they are equally represented.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No. Although content was added to the Harmful section, it is only a summary of a thesis and not an attempt to persuade.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Only one source for Huffman's article is added.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current? They appear to be.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they appear to work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The word "contemplates" is a great word but may be too complex for readers because it implies that someone is thinking about it without sharing their thoughts and Nakamura shares her view of cancel culture.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes, there are several uses of "that" in the added text, "Ethan M. Huffman's thesis concludes that teens that experienced public shaming reduce their social media participation." It may work better to say "Ethan M. Huffman's thesis indicated that teens who experienced public shaming reduced their social media participation."
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

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?

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. The content added was very helpful to the existing content.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It provides a clear summary of the harmful effects.
 * How can the content added be improved? It may help to have content added to "The importance of call-out culture" regarding celebrities as mentioned in the lead.

Overall evaluation
The content added and edited provided clarity of the entire article. Additional sections about the history and examples would help the article overall.