User:Fuller2019/Tonic water/SammiMaloney Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Fuller2019


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fuller2019/Tonic_water?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Tonic water

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * No the lead has not been updated, but other sections have
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes the lead does a good job of addressing the article.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes the lead explains everything the article will talk about.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No the lead only contains relevant information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and easy to read.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes all of the new content is relevant
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes the content is up-to-date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No I do not see any 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?
 * No the article does not deal with an equity gap.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes the content added is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No there are no heavily biased claims
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No I think this is a well rounded article
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No I do not see any attempts at persuasion.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes the content is cited
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes the content is an accurate reflection of the sources
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes the sources are thorough and accurate
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes the sources are current
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * There are a diverse spectrum of authors, but no historically marginalized individuals
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * The articles found were very good, this was a good start
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes the links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the content was very easy to read and enhanced the article.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No I could not find any errors in the new content.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes the new content is well-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 I am not sure what the image is trying to convey in regards to the topic
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The image has a simple caption, but I am still confused
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes the image adhere's to copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * There are better images that could be used

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes the content improved the article.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The content made it easier to understand the overall article
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I think there are better options for the image