User:CampbellParsons/Apple Arcade/Annyamariee 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? Campbell Parsons
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Apple Arcade

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? -No not yet, a few details in the sand box has not been included
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?- Yes there is an introductory sentence. T
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? -Yes the article describes major sections and key points/To improve the lead summary of major sections, more details could be included rather than just bullet points.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? -No it does not
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? -The lead is concise and straight to the point of the article

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?-Yes the content added is relevant to this topic, the added resources talk directly about apples and arcades
 * Is the content added up-to-date?-The content added is up to date, both articles are written in 2019
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is no content that is missing or that is irrelvant

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes that content is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No biases are present
 * 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? "Up to six family members are allowed access through family sharing". needs to be sourced
 * 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? all the links work

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?

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? not yet
 * Are images well-captioned? not yet
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? not yet
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? not yet

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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

==== Overall evaluation: Good progress so far! Just include a citation for this section "Up to six family members are allowed access through family sharing", also a bit more details rather than bullet points and a few images should be included ====