User:Chrisuw/Ben Thanh Market/Tif0409 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? I am reviewing Chrisuw's work.
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Chrisuw/Ben Thanh Market

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead has a good length, but it does not have the summary of the content. I still see some sentences above the Lead, I think it would be better to delete the.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, it doesn't.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? The lead includes partial information in the article only.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise and clear, but not exactly in detailed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes!!! I think the content is definitely relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, the content is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

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, everything seems fine.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I think it's be great to add some images for the market food.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it has a neutral tone.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Location and Night market section does not have sources cited.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, they are through.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, I saw many current sources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes!

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it is concise, clear and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes, I saw some grammatical.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? I think other night market should be below nearby attractions. Other than that, the overall content is well organized.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, it includes three different images related to the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes they are.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, they are all from Wikipedia.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes.

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 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?Yes, I think the article is more complete now, although there are some sections that still require work on, but overall it is improved.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? By adding more sections, it makes the article more detailed and informative.
 * How can the content added be improved? Maybe the History section can be moved under Location. Combine some subheadings.