User:Emmasemus/WWII Prisoner of War Camps in Utah/Sthamm113 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? Emmasemus
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Emmasemus/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Introduction is accurate to the material given
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yep
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? It could discuss the "attitude and moral" sections a bit.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise and not too long.

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? Nope it is all accurate
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? No it is just historical Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

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 there is a good mix
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it is unbiased.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes all content is backed by sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes the sources are accurate.
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Yes they are from a variety of sources. Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes the sources are written by many different sources and authors.
 * 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
 * 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

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?

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? there are a number of independent sources that are utilized
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? There are plenty of sources already with other sources ready to be used
 * 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? Everything seems good here.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes there are links to other articles.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions


 * What are the strengths of the content added? Super accurate and a good length.
 * How can the content added be improved? Flesh things out a bit, but the article isn't finished so that's fine.

==== Overall evaluation- '''Everything looks good! With the content you're looking to add it will feel complete. I would go into the lack of Japanese camps because it provides a greater context for POW's in America as a whole. A map would look great so that's good that you're doing that. Talking about POW's moving back to Utah after the war is a great thing to tie back to the Italian Service Unit parole agreement section.''' ====