User:Catfiorindi/Media and gender/Catfiorindi 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? Marionrobyn
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Media and gender Representations of women: Sexualization

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content in the section that I'm peer reviewing is relevant to the subject of Media and Gender.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Somewhat, the examples of positive representations of female sexuality that are provided in this section in are dated in the late 1990s and early 2000s. There could be more current examples listed.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes, there could be more current examples of both negative and positive representations of female sexuality in media added to this section.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes, this section and in particular the overall section that it belongs to (representations of women) deals with a historically underrepresented population.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, the content is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, there are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position in the article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, there are no viewpoints that overrepresented or underrepresented.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, the content does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, the sources are thorough and reflect that available literature on the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * All of the sources are from the early 2000s or earlier, more current sources could be incorporated.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes, the sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * One links does not work, all of the other links do.

==== Sources and references evaluation: The sources used in this section are thorough and from a diverse spectrum of authors. However, all of the sources are a bit dated and one of them has been flagged as an unreliable source. ====

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The content in this section is well-written and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There are no major grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The content is mostly well-organized. The last sentence of the section does seem to be a bit of a throwaway. The author briefly mention the theory of the male gaze and doesn't provided details about how this theory ties in to representation of women's sexuality in media - It's not well tied for a theory that is pretty integral the whole concept.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * This section provides good overall information about the representation of female sexuality in media with some strong sources.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * The content could be improved with more current examples and more time spent on the theory of the male gaze.