User:Francescacast/Cheryl Heller/Jokerridd101 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? (Francescacast)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? ya the lead looks pretty there could be a little bit more to add
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes the lead looks like it covers the whole topic
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes the lead looks like it contains a pretty good description of the articles sections
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? There's actually not a lot of detail so i would definately suggest to add more

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
Yes the content is pretty relevant on Wikipedia because I cant find my peer review article

The content does not seem fully up to date.

Personally I think they can add much more to this article.

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
Yes the content seems to be neutral

no

I would say some underrepresent

The content that is added does seem to persuade the reader about the article.

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
Yes it looks like it.

yes the sources seem to be thorough.

I don't know cant really tell.

Yes the link work.

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 content is not that well written but easy to read.

no not that I see.

No the content that is added is not well organized I would definately add more.

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 the article has one image.

Ya the images are ok captioned

I think so like I'm not a Wikipedia legend.

Ya i would say so there ok.

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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
I think the article needs some work but therefore is pretty complete in my opinion.

Some strengths of the content added is that it shows what she accomplished in her life.

I would say be as concise as possible.