User:EmDom521/Fred Mhalu/Routarchita 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)
 * EmDom521
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:EmDom521/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes. The Lead is informative and gives an overview of the content.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes. The introductory sentence specifies who Fred Mhalu is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes. It touches on the past and present work of Fred Mhalu, which is what the article focuses on.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is the perfect balance of being short and detailed. It gives a good overview of the content.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. It focuses on the history of the scientist, while also providing a good detail of their work and their impact.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes. Content was added recently.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * More details can be added on the present work; however this is not necessary.

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. The content is neutral and gives a good summary of the scientist. At no point is a bias statement made.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes. There are many different sources coming from many different years.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes. They focus on topics not directly related to Fred Mhalu; but include details about his work.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Mostly. Most of the sources come from the 1990's and the early 2000's.
 * 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. The content is not too wordy and gives a good overview of the work done by Fred Mhalu.
 * 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?
 * Yes. The contents allow the article to be organized into major topics, allowing the article to be well-organized.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

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?
 * Yes. Many sources of a wide variety are included.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * There are many sources listed that focus on different but related topics. Not many primary sources are used which is good.
 * 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?
 * The way the article is organized is similar to other articles.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * Specific ideas are highlighted which link to other articles. A "see also" page can also be added.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * A lot of important information has been added making this article well completed.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * There is a good amount of detail on the history and the overall career of the person, giving the reader a good summary of the person's life and contributions.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Images and more on the present work of the person can be included; however, this is not necessary.