User:Dmontalvo98/Bioplastic/Alexissabatelle 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) dmontalvo98
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Dmontalvo98/Bioplastic

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? there does not seem to be content that is missing

Content evaluation
content is good, could use some actual information

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

Tone and balance evaluation
the content seems neutral, the information is just information that does not sway the reader one way or the other

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? there are no citations for information that is going to be added
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? no sources
 * Are the sources current? no sources
 * Check a few links. Do they work? no sources

Sources and references evaluation
add sources that you plan on using when you add the new information

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? the goal of what to read is clear, even if there is not real information
 * 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? broken down into where they want to add information and what they want to add

Organization evaluation
there is good thought into how or what will be changed in the article, however, there is not actual new information

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?

Images and media evaluation
DID NOT ADD ANY NEW IMAGES OR MEDIA

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?

New Article Evaluation
NOT A NEW ARTICLE

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? I believe once the information is actually complete it will improve the article
 * What are the strengths of the content added? going to be good content being added
 * How can the content added be improved? actually stating the information that is being added, not just stating ideas.

Overall evaluation
it is a good start. the ideas that this student has are good for improving this article. if they stick to the ideas and actually show the new information they want to add and where in the article it will be even better and complete the article. but good work so far.