User:Divyareddy11/User:Sarai1021/Ralph Fabri/Divyareddy11 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? I am reviewing Sarai1021's work.


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Sarai1021/Ralph Fabri :
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Ralph Fabri

Evaluate the drafted changes
Peer review

Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the lead updated reflects the new content added by the peer.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? I think the biography has the basic information for the topic. It includes basics such as life/death dates, nationality, residency and art movement.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes the lead does have the article's major sections with a biography, education, career, authored works, exhibitions, honors & awards and references.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, the lead has more information that is not presented from the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise but can have more information added in the biography about Ralph Fabri's life.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the content added is informational and relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes the content added is up-to-date and accurate.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think it has all the information needed.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No, it does not have a Wikipedia's equality gap. No, the topics does not relate to historically underrepresented population or topics.

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, there isn't any claims that are heavily biased that appear towards a particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I think the viewpoints are underpresented and can have more information added that can demonstrate details.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The content added persuades the reader in favor of one by persuading the reader with accurate information.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all new content is backed up with reliable secondary source of information.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) Yes, the content accurately reflects what the cited sources say, and the sources have the information that is cited.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Some of sources are from the internet and do reflect the available literature on the topic.
 * Are the sources current? Some of the sources are current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No, the sources are not diverse spectrum of authors and no it does not relate to historically marginalized individuals.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) The article has most of the good websites but there are more websites that are available that can be used for information.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes the links do work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the content added is well-written. It is clear and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, there aren't any grammatical or spelling errors mistakes.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes the content added is well organized and broken down into sections that reflects the major points of the topic.

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


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

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for 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 it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * 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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Examples of good feedback
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.


 * Peer review of "Homemaking"
 * Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Additional Resources
Check out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions.