User:Chrisreg509/COVID-19 impact on animals/Adinello 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? (provide username) Chrisreg509
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Chrisreg509/COVID-19 impact on animals

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? My peer wrote their own article and has updated their content.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The lead does indeed include a good introductory sentence that concisely describes the topic of the article.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead does not include a brief description of the major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Being that the article isn't full written yet, there are some points not present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise and straight to the point.

Lead evaluation
Overall, the lead was concise and easy to read, however, it should be modified to include the major sections of the article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content added is all relevant to the topic since it outlines the effects of the virus on animals.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? The content is up to date since it is in regards to the Corona Virus and it is happening right now.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is no missing content or content that is out of place being that all the information pertains to the corona virus and the effect on animals.

Content evaluation
The content is very up to date and well written.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? The content added is neutral and non-biased.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are no heavily biased claims whatsoever.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, the points stated are facts all cited from reliable sources about the impact of COVID 19 on animals.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content added is not persuasive nor biased in any way.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the tone is non-biased and does not attempt to persuade or favor any position.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? All content is supported by a reliable source of information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources are thorough and present plenty of reliable information concerning the pandemic and its effects on animals.
 * Are the sources current? Sources are current since the Corona virus pandemic is happening right now.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links work.

Sources and references evaluation
Sources are reliable, up to date, and functional.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The content is well written, concise, and easy to comprehend.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? The content does not have any grammatical/spelling errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Content is very organized so far. It has proper heading and broken down into sections that reflect the major points of article.

Organization evaluation
Overall, the article has very good organization so far.

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 so far.
 * Are images well-captioned? There are no images so far.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There are no images so far.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There are no images so far.

Images and media evaluation
The article has no images so far.

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? The article has 6 reliable sources so far that are independent of the subject.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? It accurately represents all available literature since the pandemic is happening right now and still on-going.
 * 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? The article does follow patterns of similar articles but does not replicate.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? No the article does not link to other articles.

New Article Evaluation
Overall, this new article is written very well and just needs images added.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The content added is all written by the peer since this is a new article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Very thorough, concise, and supported by reliable sources.
 * How can the content added be improved? By adding more information to the lead in regards to major sections in the article and adding images.

Overall evaluation
Overall, great job on article so far and just needs to work on lead for improvement.