User:FelixMH60/Water quality law/Apugarica 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? Adrianna (FelixMH6o)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:FelixMH60/sandbox

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 reflect the new content and includes a good intro sentence. The leads includes info regarding the major sections, and is overall concise.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The content added is up to date and relevant to water quality laws. I saw that the section for dumping bans was removed and I think that it would be an interesting gap to fill, but the rest of the content added is good and informative. Another aspect that might be helpful is understanding how these laws are passed and the process to create them.

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 of the content does not seem entirely neutral it seems like the purpose is to persuade the reader to believe the water laws have to be a certain way that wont ever change (ie specific word choice, must, may.)

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Not all the new information is cited, but the two additional resources are reliable. The sources are current, work, and provide a diverse spectrum of authors.

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 writing is clearer than the original and does not have any obvious grammatical or spelling errors. All the major sections are well organized and have sufficient information.

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
No media was added.

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 the article is clear as law can be and omitted unnecessary information that was not helpful for the overall impact of understanding water law. The added strengths to this article was the lead and simplifying the original text. It can be improved by adding citations to new sentences and making them more straightforward and more sure of the content that is being added.