User:Cjkennedy15/Bud, Not Buddy/Aschmidt32 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? CjKennedy15
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Cjkennedy15/Bud, Not Buddy

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the lead has been updated to reflect content added or moved by CjKennedy15.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the first sentences states what the article is about and provides information about it.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, it does not. The lead simply provides an introduction for this article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No the lead is concise, but it could do with some addition of what is covered in the article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content added is relevant to the topic, but there are some misspelled words and spacing issues that can cause confusion.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There does not to appear to be any content that is missing, the content added flows well and helps round out the article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, the content added is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, all claims and added information are neutral.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, there is no attempt to persuade the reader.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, the content is backed up by reliable secondary sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, the sources are thorough and reflect what is available on this topic.
 * Are the sources current? The sources appear to be current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The first two reference links lead to a page that requires a log in for the University of Washington or for Gale.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Mostly, some of the content should be revised.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes, some words do not have spaces between them, some are grammatical incorrect, and some are spelled wrong.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It is well organized, but the grammatical and spelling errors should be fixed.

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 new content has added helpful information to the article. However, spacing and other issues should be fixed to make the article stronger.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The added content provides more background on the novel and it explains how the novel was received and how it is used as a teaching tool in schools.
 * How can the content added be improved? Fixing the grammatical and spacing errors is the only thing that really needs improvement.