User:Blasianmanda/Flipp Dinero/Kelleyschiedler 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?
 * Blasianmanda
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Flipp Dinero

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, but could be elaborated more on
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, introduces the reader to who the article is going to be about
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Article is primarily going to be focused on his career as a musicain but the Career section is not filled in yet.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Very concise

Lead evaluation
Lead has a good start to it. Citations need to be added as well as some formatting, but this is just the draft. Since he is a less well-known artist there is not much more to include in the lead than already stated.

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?
 * Not necessarily. A little confused on why featured songs are included, when there is already a whole discography on HIS music.

Content evaluation
Contents section makes sense for this article. I am only questioning the featured works section, as I am not sure how important or relevant that may be.

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 because this article is not yet finished
 * 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?
 * semi. needs to include more. article not yet done
 * 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?
 * 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
Minor spelling and grammar errors that need to be fixed. Formatting needs improvement, but again this article is not yet finished

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * debatable
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * yes

Images and media evaluation
Need help to understand how to make sure the image is adhering to the regulations.

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. But still needs work
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * pictures, early life enhancements
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Career section can be filled in, journey to fame section if there is enough information on that.

Overall evaluation
Overall, I realize it is harder to find sources for smaller named artists as I too am struggling with. This article has little more work it needs to have done before it can go live. But making good progress!