User:Corbin Blackett/Donnell Walton/VicVal2315 Peer Review

General info
Corbin Blackett
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Corbin Blackett/Donnell Walton
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):User:Corbin Blackett/Donnell Walton

Evaluate the drafted changes
Lead

The article has a strong lead that sufficiently introduces who the subject is and what he does. The article's introductory sentence clearly describes who and what the article is about. The Lead includes brief descriptions for Education and Career sections, but does not include a brief description of the Personal Life section. The lead does include information that is not present elsewhere in the article - the portion referencing Donnell Walton being outspoken about getting more minorities into physics. I think that this portion could possibly be added to the Personal Life section as it gives an insight into the subject's personal beliefs. The Lead is concise and does not include too man details or irrelevant details.

Content

The article contains content that is relevant to the topic - Donnell Walton and his life and work. I feel that the content added is up to date, as the latest source is dated 3/22/24. The article is missing content in the Personal Life and Publications section. I do not feel that the article contains content that does not belong. The article does not deal with Wikipedia's equity gap. However, it does reference the subject voicing his support for more minorities in the field of Physics, which relates to a historically underrepresented population.

Tone and Balance

I feel that the content added to this article is neutral in tone because the article does not attempt to sway the reader towards any particular belief or viewpoint. The overall tone of the article is informative. The information is presented concisely. The article makes no claims that appear heavily biased towards a specific side or view. The article does not support a specific position on any topic. The article does not contain any viewpoints that are underrepresented or overrepresented, again the tone overall is informative without expressing a certain outlook. The article does not attempt to sway the reader in any particular direction.

Sources and References

All content added is backed up by sources. Each section includes sources throughout. The article accurately reflects the information that is presented in the sources. The interview has a lot of information in it that can possibly be used for sections of the article. I think that the sources are thorough because they reflect the information that is currently available for this person. However, I think that some sources can be looked into again because there is a lot of information included in one of the sources(the interview). Three of the sources are current - they are dated for the current month and year. One of the sources is not current, as it comes from 2013. The sources do not appear very diverse. One sources was authored by a woman but I could not find the authors of the other 3. I could not find any better alternative sources such as peer reviewed journals. All 4 of the source links work correctly.

Organization

I feel that the content is written well. It is clear, concise and easy to follow. I could not find any grammatical or spelling errors. The article appears well organized. The lead in is clear and each following section is laid out.

Images and Media

The article does not contain any images or media.

For New Articles

The article meets the Notability requirement. All sources listed in the bibliography are used in the article. The article links to a different article.

Overall Impressions

The content added has improved the article overall in my opinion. The strengths of added content are: readability, clarity and accuracy. The content can be improved by filling in the missing sections and adding a picture.