User:Chodges8/Apathy/Cfarmer4 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Chodges8


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chodges8/Apathy?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Apathy

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead has been updated in the sandbox but not on the live article. A sentence was added to describe an apathetic person's lack of goal oriented activities. I think that this is a good addition and I liked the edit made by our instructor to leave off the "compared to their previous state" since some apathetic people have always been apathetic.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? I think the original lead is concise and does a good job of summarizing the topic that will be discussed.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The major sections are not mentioned but i think the still flows well into the body of the article. You could add a sentence that outlines the sections and their order.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content is relevant. You could add more details and research into the "other" section. I think this section could be renamed to make it more cohesive with the rest of the article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? The tone is neutral and does not seem to use biased language.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The claim "People that suffer from severe apathy tend to have a lower quality of life and are at a higher risk for mortality and early institutionalization" needs a citation since this is a claim based on data. If you could add a citation that verifies this information, that would make it more reliable. I looked at the source you cited and this is a direct quotation from the article so it should have quotation marks and the citation.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) The content does reflect the findings of the source and is relevant to the topic.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current? The source is current and was posted this year and was last edited in March.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The link works and gives access to the full article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? I think that the additions made to the article have made it better. I would look at editing the section called "Other" to bring it to the same level at the other sections.

Overall, I think that you have done a great job on your tone and wording. I would just add citations and keep researching!