User:DreadnoughtusDino/Chile Rise/Tigitar 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)  DreadnoughtusDino
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:DreadnoughtusDino/Chile Rise

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No, the lead has not been updated I don't think.  The draft just plans to include the original from the stub.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yeah I'd say so.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? I don't think so, no.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think it's pretty concise.

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? I don't think so.

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 believe so.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I think more could be added.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, within 25 years.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yep

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? I think there are a couple of weird punctuation and word choices.  In the third line under "Future of Rise" you might want to change your second to last sentence.  Maybe change "If fracture of the rigid lithosphere were to happen" to something like 'if fracturing were to occur within the rigid lithosphere'  maybe it would flow a little better.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Maybe some small ones but I honestly can't really tell for sure.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? There isn't too much added so there isn't much to be organized right now.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There aren't any pictures added, which might be something to try and add.
 * 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 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? The additional material does help, yes, but it's still a little sparse.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? I like the details on the newer geophysics models as well as the descriptions of the east and west ends of the feature.
 * How can the content added be improved? I would like to know more about the physical location of the Chile Rise, maybe where is it in relation to Chile.  I might also want to know more about the importance of understanding this feature.

Overall evaluation
I think it's a pretty good start but it could definitely afford to be beefed up a bit.