User:Gabydrod/Women in Leadership/Katharinearodriguez 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? Gabydrod
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Women in leadership

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
Yes, the information in the lead has been updated to reflect the new content added by my peer by explaining positions of women in power in a very direct way. The lead also has an introductory sentence that shows me exactly what the article will be about. The lead does not necessarily introduce the article's major sections but, it is very clear on what the information in the article will be about. The lead is very concise and straight to the point.

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 added is relevant to the topic. The content added is also very up to date with sources from 2017 and 2019. There is no content that does not belong and I believe the content added was adequate for the 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
The content is very neutral as it explains women's leadership roles around the world and in business settings. It is not biased, however, it does shed the truth which is very unfortunate to see, but women have always gotten the short end of the stick. I guess a male standpoint is underrepresented, but I do not know what that would add to this particular 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
All the new content is indeed backed up by reliable and relevant sources and these sources reflect the article almost perfectly. Most of the sources are current and the ones that are considered "older" date back to 2008 which for research's sake is relevant. All the links 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 added is well written and concise. I did not catch any major grammatical or spelling errors. All the sections perfectly illustrate the major points of the topic and 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?
 * 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
The article includes one image of the female or Venus symbol. The image is indeed well-captioned and it adheres to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. The image is laid out in a visually appealing way.

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
Yes, the article does meet the Notability requirements by far with many sources. There is an extensive list of 58 sources which all represent available literature on the subject. The article looks like any other reliable wikipedia article and it does 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
The content added was an original article so it was very complete in my opinion. The strengths of the article include: the fact that women in positions of power is a very specific area of study that is fully and completely analyzed in this article even ranging in different regions of the world. The only thing this article needs is maybe more images or infographics, but besides that the article was very refreshing.