User:Brendanepton/Police misconduct/Lsheban 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)
 * Brendan Epton
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Brendanepton/Police misconduct

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * He has yet to work on the lead
 * 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?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * The content added is relevant, it incorporates modern day costs of police misconduct.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * The content is up to date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * The content added seems to be neutral. There are no biases and it is purely factual.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, there is room for him to add info about other countries though.
 * 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, Brendan has a multitude of sources. Some are not academic sources though.
 * 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?
 * Yes, some sentences could be formatted differently. This sentence in particular: "Perhaps the most costly individual settlement ever due to police misconduct occurred in Chicago when Christina Eilman suffered from a bipolar episode at Midway Airport and was arrested." The sentence needs to be shortened.
 * 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?
 * Yes

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, it includes a graph of expenses in the 10 largest cities.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes, this brought attention to an important topic that people may not otherwise think about or understand.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * It is very detail oriented and is written in a way that someone who is not an expert on the topic could understand.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Some sentences could be shortened or reconstructed. He could also add a couple more countries if need be.

Overall evaluation
Overall, this article addition seems like it is almost ready to be posted on WIKI. It is thorough and follows guidelines and is a great addition.