User:Emilyhooge/Maison Carrée/BAWyo 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

 * Username: Emilyhooge
 * Article: Maison Carrée

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?

Lead evaluation
The Lead section is concise and includes a short summary of the important information about the Maison Carrée. It also includes other works that have been influenced by the Maison Carrée. In the Lead, there is information about all of other main sections in the article. Overall, the Lead does a good job introducing the structure by providing the reader with a solid summary of what the Maison Carrée is, without going into too much detail.

Content
Guiding questions:


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

Content evaluation
The main additions were to the new Influence section. I think that this new section is a good addition to the article, and has room for more expansion in the future. This section goes into a lot of detail in to how Thomas Jefferson modified traits of the Maison Carrée in his work. I think shortening some of that would help, as well as adding in examples of influence from other works besides Jefferson's.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
Some sentences, such as the first sentence of the Influence section, seem to be guiding the reader to a conclusion. This isn't a common problem with the article, so some rewording is all that this would require to fix.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The References section of this article is fairly short, with only two references. One of these references comes from 1964, and another from 2002, so there could be more up-to-date information available. In the Notes section, some other sources are listed. Again, none of these sources seem to be very recent. The Influence section does not have any sources referenced in it.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The content added is well-written, and is in sections that it belongs to. Overall, the article and its recent editions are well organized and easy to read.

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
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?
 * 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
N/A

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
I think that the content added improves the article and makes it seem more well-rounded. Adding information about how the Maison Carrée is relevant to more modern architecture was a good choice. The addition of sources listed throughout the Influence section, and possibly images to provide examples, would further improve the article.