User:Dkwillsey/Microgadus tomcod/Jalashiareliford 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? (provide username)
 * Dkwillsey
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dkwillsey/New_sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * the lead section was already pretty extensive but because there are no headings in the article, User Dkwillsey is adding his information to the lead section as well. So it will be included.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes, too much information
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * there are no sections
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * yes because the lead section is supposed to be an overview of the article. Instead the lead section is basically the whole article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * overly detailed in sense of a lead section, but because it is the article itself I'd say its okay

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * yes and no. the articles are from 2011 and 2006
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * no
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * no

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no
 * 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

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes I think so
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * yes and no, read above
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * 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
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * no
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * the article has no sections so I would say yes

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * User Dkwillsey didn't add any pictures but the original did have some
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * no
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I don't know
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * not really

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?
 * 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?

Overall evaluation
Your actual peer review was posted in your talk page (the word document questions) and I think it should notify you!