User:Brown34s/Zulu people /LiuXianSenCMU 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)

Brown34s


 * Link to draft    you're reviewing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zulu_people

Lead

Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead    been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?

Yes.


 * 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.


 * Does the Lead    include information that is not present in the article?

Yes.


 * Is the Lead    concise or is it overly detailed?

The Lead is overly detailed.

Lead evaluation

Good effort I think. And there is some good points in this revision.

Content

Guiding questions:


 * Is the    content added relevant to the topic?

Yes.


 * Is the    content added up-to-date?

I’m afraid not.


 * Is there    content that is missing or content that does not belong?

No.

Content evaluation

The author did really find some informative content to add in.

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?

I’m afraid not.

Tone and balance evaluation

The author took into account the tone and balance.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:


 * Is all new    content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

I’m sorry. I cannot find any.


 * Are the    sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the     topic?

I cannot find any.


 * Are the    sources current?

I cannot find any.


 * Check a few    links. Do they work?

I cannot find any.

Sources and references evaluation

I think there might be more authoritative references for further researches.

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.


 * Is the    content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect     the major points of the topic?

Yes.

Organization evaluation

The author organized this revision well.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the    article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

No added images.


 * Are images    well-captioned?

No added images.


 * Do all images    adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

No added images.


 * Are the images    laid out in a visually appealing way?

No added images.

Images and media evaluation

I’m afraid there is no added images and media.

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?

New Article Evaluation

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:


 * Has the    content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the     article more complete?

Yes.


 * What are the strengths    of the content added?

The revised one shows more information.


 * How can the    content added be improved?

We can find more information about this group.

Overall evaluation

I cannot find new cited works.