User:Erinford44/Job strain/Dreya00 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? Erinford44
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Erinford44/Job strain

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
I did not really see a lead or anything stating what new content would be added.

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
I think the content that has been added could be expanded even further. I think going into more detail on how each stressor is caused and ways to cope would be good and also providing a reference section and providing the number correspondence versus putting the website under the information. I believe with more content and reorganizing the article there will be a higher level of progress shown.

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
The content I read is fairly neutral, but it is gender divided heavily. I think in the generalization of job strain the genders are less important than the causes and resources that are available or need to be available. I think the main issue with my ability to peer edit this well is the lack of organization and content that is currently represented.

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 content has sources, however the sources are not organized correctly or cited correctly. The way I found easiest to cite sources is to use the cite button to add the citation, copy and paste the citation in a reference section at the bottom of the page (using the heading button to headline the reference section.) Adding this section will help keep information concise and improve organization.

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
Same thing as the previous section, I think adding more sections and a reference section will improve the organization. As of right now I feel like organization and content are the biggest aspects that need work.

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
Overall I think there definitely room for improvement for sure with this article mostly regarding content and organization. I think once the few issues are resolved then this article will be a great revision and will provide much needed information all in one place. I believe this topic is very touchy right now in the current social circumstances and that information should continue to remain very unbiased. I am excited for this class to contribute to something that impacts more than just us!