User:Erinelizabethjones/Seattle channel/Erica-Schroeder 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

 * Erinelizabethjones
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Erinelizabethjones/sandbox

Lead evaluation
The Lead was the only section that had content before Erin updated the article. The Lead adequately describes the topic in a concise way and introduces the all of articles main sections below.

Content evaluation
All content in article is relevant and all sources are very recently published. More information on Seattle Mayoral news conferences and City Council meetings may be beneficial to provide everything that the channel covers. A "History" section may also be beneficial to the article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:

Tone and balance evaluation
The content in the sections that Erin added are presented in a neutral tone. The only place that I would reconsider rewording is in the Lead. The phrase like "It not only..." sounds kind of like an argument with a bias to the Seattle Channel over other channels.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:

Sources and references evaluation
Sources have all been recently published and the links work. The sources are appropriate for the topic.

Organization evaluation
Content is presented in an easy to read and follow manner. The organization follows the way in which the Lead presents the topics which is effective. No obvious grammatical or spelling errors that I could find.

Images and media evaluation
The images added are a good addition and well captioned. I think the logo might be better placed next to the Lead, but besides that, the rest of the images are placed in effective locations next to the section they relate to.

Overall evaluation
The article has been improved with the addition of sections and photos. The content is neutrally presented in the sections. It seems that most information is cited, however the CityStream section doesn't have a citation in its section. It has been significantly improved, but maybe a couple more sections would be beneficial.