User:Emilyngu3/Mighty-O Donuts/Yoshi-dawg Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Emilyngu3


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Emilyngu3/Mighty-O_Donuts


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Mighty-O Donuts

Lead

 * The Lead has not been updated to reflect the new content added by Emily, however, they did add a box labeled 'Contents' that has labeled new sections and acts as a general outline of the article. The Lead does a good job of having a clear and concise sentence to start off the article. The Lead mentions that Mighty-O donates unsold doughnuts to local non-profits or hospitals. You could perhaps expand on that in the Contents part of your article since you mentioned it in the Lead. The Lead is the most detailed of your whole article which is great but you could try dispersing some of that information so you would have more text in the Contents portion of your article.

Content

 * The content added by Emily is relevant. They use new information as recent as January 2022 which is up to date. I think they could add a bit more information about the company's story of how they got started or why they decided to be a facility to focus on vegan, zero-trans fat, and organic products. I think there is a lot to dive in on for that part of the company's background. I don't know how important it is to include the information about how you can use apps to get it delivered to your home so you could potentially take that out and add a section about the company's origin story and why they wanted to be a vegan doughnut company. The article does not deal with any of Wikipedia's equity gaps. However, I think the whole second paragraph of the Lead could be moved down to the main content of the article and be labeled "community" or something like that.

Tone and Balance

 * The overall tone of the article is pretty neutral. There are not a lot of adjectives describing anything in general so there is not very much room for personal opinion which is good. I don't notice any heavily biased opinions towards a particular position.

Sources and References

 * The new content is backed up by secondary sources like news websites. They also reference PETA which is a reliable source as well as King 5 news. However, I did have trouble accessing the King 5, Q13 Fox, and Seattle Times articles so I would make sure to go back and make sure you linked them correctly. As for content accurately reflecting what the sources say I think Emily did a good job of this. They did mention serving beer at one of their locations you could add that information to your page. The sources used are mainly neighborhood blogs that discuss the doughnut shop which seems appropriate since there will not be a lot of academic peer reviewed journals on a doughnut shop. The sources cover a good range of time. If you have not tried already you could go to the UW Library site and look up Mighty-O Donuts and they have a couple sources there. You will probably have to request a scan of the article but it doesn't take that long if you want another reliable source.

Organization

 * The content is well written. As I said before I recommend moving your second paragraph out of the Lead and make it its whole own new section. It is very concise but maybe could benefit from adding a little more information. I did not see any grammatical errors or spelling mistakes. I think your sub topics are good.

Images and Media

 * You do not have any images but if you live in Seattle it would not be too difficult to go to a Mighty-O yourself and snap a few pictures for your wiki page.

Overall Impressions

 * You have definitely improved the article. I think your biggest strengths is the amount organization you added through your new format. I think you would benefit from added a little more information in your subtopics if possible and maybe add some pictures.

Yoshi-dawg (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC) Yoshi-dawg