User:Breannapalmer/Nellie McClung/TaliaMary 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?  Breannapalmer
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Breannapalmer/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No, its mainly point form. I don't think that means they have a lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? No, its mainly point form
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, its mainly point form
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, its mainly point form
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No its mainly point form

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? I think that there could be more information added about how she impacted the history of feminist thought specifically.

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? No
 * 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? She has not added in specific sources from what I could see, I think she just put down possible sources
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? [see above]
 * Are the sources current? [see above]
 * Check a few links. Do they work? I dont think they have been linked yet

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Its mainly in point form. But so far it looks good!
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Again its point form, so its good, but I don't think this is a major concern at this point.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? She spoke about adding sections so that is promising, but again point form.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Non have been added but it looks like she had concerns / issues uploading them!
 * Are images well-captioned? Non have been added but it looks like she had concerns / issues uploading them!
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Non have been added but it looks like she had concerns / issues uploading them!
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Non have been added but it looks like she had concerns / issues uploading them!

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 info boxes, 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, and no because its just point form.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Yes, I think she is going to explore new topics.
 * How can the content added be improved? I think just adding more would be good!

Overall evaluation
[Also on her talk page] Hi Breanna, this is Talia! I am peer-reviewing your article, but I am not sure how this space will allow us to chat so if you have any questions about my feedback please ask me in class! First of all, I liked where you are going with your bullet points and what you are planning to write, I know a lot of it is bullet points (which is challenging for peer editing) but I think that it was some good brainstorming. Personally, I think that a lot has been written about Nellie McClung because of how famous she is, but I think it would be really really interesting to write about how she affected feminist thought her actions that had a negative impact (such as eugenics) and are  anti-feminist, and how that has impacted feminist thought. For example, I think it would be interesting to learn about how she has lead to feminists being able to think about feminist and recognize the good they did, while also understanding the negative impacts that they had and how we can be critical of these actions. I think it would also be interesting to learn more about the conversations that feminists have had about whether or not she should even be considered feminist, as I think this is something I have heard lots about but not read a lot about and Wikipedia might be the first people learn about her and about this debate. Finally, I think it's important to make sure that you are not just repeating information, but are adding something new and interesting! I hope this all made sense!