User:ColdRainyDay45/Click tracking/Midnightinterludes 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? ColdRainyDay45
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Click tracking

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it is a definition.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Kind of, can make more apparent connections in the lead to the sections you have in the article
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Product design is included but not discussed too much in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, all in 2000s.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Could improve with content regarding privacy concerns, incognito browser differences (if any), and maybe on sponsored links (the links that appear first on a search page because companies have paid Google to have it listed first).

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, most of the content is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not heavily, but I would add more about click tracking cons because the article mainly talks about improvements and benefits
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Underrepresented on the cons side
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Not really.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, but should incorporate more sources if possible (from annotated bibliography)
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * 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, explanations are clear.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? A few but added edits to it.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, I think the sections break down the topic quite nicely.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? N/A
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

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? Yes.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Not too exhaustive. Should try to add more sources if possible.
 * 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? No.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? N/A but I think the content so far is good.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? I think the content is well laid out and the article organization is great. There are appropriate citations and hyperlinks throughout the article.
 * How can the content added be improved? I think information regarding incognito browsers, privacy policies and concerns could be added to help improve the article.