User:Cfellowss/Deaths of Dhal Pothwi Apet, 17, and Lueth Mo, 15/Alliegeller Peer Review

General info
Anais Mejia, Cfellowss
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Cfellowss/Deaths of Dhal Pothwi Apet, 17, and Lueth Mo, 15
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, it accurately reflects the content added.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, but it’s a little confusing. I read it twice to fully understand what the topic was describing.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Because this is about a crime, I think it accurately explains what exactly happened. It doesn’t mention a description about the other major sections, but I don’t really know how they would do that.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the lead stays very on topic.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think the lead is very good but it might be a little too detailed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, discussing the people involved helped accurately tell the story.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, everything is from 2023 onward.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, I think adding details about the funeral was a nice way to tie the article together.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes, this article addresses topics related to police brutality.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, kudos to them for remaining neutral with such a hard topic to cover.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, I thought this had a really good balance.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, they accurately told an unfortunate story.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, they have a lot of citations within their article.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes, I read through their sources and they are in conjunction with their article.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes, they did a good job of including historically marginalized individuals. If they want to take it a step further, they can mention or create a section  to other victims of police brutality.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, their links worked for me.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The content is pretty well written, I thought it was organized. Like I said, I think the lead can be written in a way that’s easier to understand.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I didn’t see any typos.
 * 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?
 * There are no images, however I think this article can benefit from them.

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for 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?
 * Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Yes, there is a good amount of resources, and they seem accurate and reliable.
 * 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?
 * Yes, their headings are helpful.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * I didn’t see any links to other articles.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes, it gave a full description of the events that took place on September 6th, 2023.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Including detailed descriptions of all of the members involved, as well as details on the aftermath of the murders.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I think discussing sociological implications by mentioning other victims of police brutality could benefit this article.