User:FernazMohamadi/Women Forward/Tooba99 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? FernazMohamadi
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:FernazMohamadi/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Not sure (see below)
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Not sure (see below)
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not sure (see below)
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Not sure (see below)
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Not sure (see below)

Lead evaluation
I wasn't sure if the "history" section is meant to the the lead section or not. Could maybe add a lead section that generally summarized what Women Forward is.

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? No

Content evaluation
Content looks good! Could maybe include more details about who Ngobese is — maybe there could be a separate section on just Ngobese.

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
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Yes

Tone and balance evaluation
Great! Love the "controversies" section to ensure balance

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Great

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

Organization evaluation
Clearly organized

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

Images and media evaluation
Maybe add photos of Ngobese or of a Women Forward poster?

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?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Everything is well cited and clearly unbiased
 * How can the content added be improved? Can explain a little more about subtopics that seem important, like Ngobese

Overall evaluation
Great article on an interesting topic!