User:Dianevanderwal/Social information processing (theory)/Katie.scht Peer Review

General info
u/Dianevanderwal
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Dianevanderwal/Social information processing (theory)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Social information processing (theory)

Lead
The lead for the SIP article is overall strong. Because Diane just added small changes to sections, the lead doesn't really need to be edited from how it is currently. This lead is strong as it is concise while still giving a sense of what the article covers. The only edit I would suggest is talking about practical applications/real-world examples of where we see SIP show up.

-Hey Katie, I agree with all of this. Greg and I also discussed moving the Forms of Self section.

Content
Diane has contributed several relevant edits to the article that slightly expands on what has already been written. Additionally, she has been able to fix areas that have needed citation and find sources to back up the claims. One thing that stood out to me was the length of direct quotes. Per Wikipedia recommendations, we should be wary of using direct quotes to avoid copyright violations. Because of this, I would encourage Diane to use more of her own words to summarize what the authors are saying in their respective writings.

-Ill definitely be paraphrasing my own edits for sure. I just need to also spend the time to do that with previous author's works as well.

Tone and Balance
Because this article is about a communication theory, it lends itself well to being neutral. I don't feel like it is particularly persuasive in any direction. Even so, Diane does a great job of keeping things neutral and using several voices about the theory to bolster the general agreement across multiple academic fields (i.e. communication, sociology).

-There's a few instances where previous authors used terminology like "obviously" and "clearly", so I'll definitely need to go back and adjust that as well.

Sources and References
Diane was able to add more information and clarification in several spots throughout the articles. After looking at her additions, I was happy to see that she was adding citations to claims not previously cited. The citations lead to accurate information that falls under Wikipedia's guidelines.

- I also need to update a few older sources and quotes from the 7th/8th edition of the textbook.

Organization
Because there is a lot of information about SIP, it would be easy for it to all get lost in the structure of the article. However, this article already has a pretty straight-forward organizational pattern. Diane's contributions are grammatically-correct and easy to read as well.

Images and Media
This is an area where I can see some area for improvement. There is one picture already in the article that meets guidelines and gives a visual representation of the content. However, I think that more graphics from studies using SIP or pictures of those known for contributing to SIP would really help break up the article for those who aren't as familiar with communication academic writing. I would recommend this as a place to add some contributions before the end of the semester.

- I completely agree. This is a really long article, with some pretty confusing wording and explanations. If I can find a few good images/graphs to include I'm sure those will be super helpful.

Overall Impressions
I think Diane has a great start on this article. Her additions elaborate on the existing information in a clear and concise format. She also added some great citations to claims that had no backing. The next steps for this article are reducing the number of direct quotes in favor of ethical summarization and addition of images and media to make the article more accessible to someone who doesn't know much about the study of communication.