User:Btymoniewicz/Lesbian Contradiction/Meshinui Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Btymoniewicz


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Btymoniewicz/Lesbian_Contradiction?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
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? No

Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No

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? Content missing because it is still a WIP.

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes, this is a new page

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

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Not yet

Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? Yes

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Not yet

Are the sources current? Yes

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Not yet

Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? Yes, but they will likely be added later.

Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

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

Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? Not yet

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? Not many sources yet

Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, it didn't exist before

What are the strengths of the content added? Concise and tells everything about the author one might wish to know

How can the content added be improved? Adding more and finishing the page