User:Gagasantos/Possession Value/Haowen Wan 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? (provide username) Gagasantos
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Gagasantos/Possession Value

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? My peer did a great job to update the lead to reflect new content
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The article have a great introduction about possession value
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The article have a brief description of possession value
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? The lead have a whole view of its topic
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Overly detailed

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, it talks the formula
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, this was the newest way of calculating
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think few more content should add, like the possession value in different leagues.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? The article didn't deal with one of wikipedia equity gaps, and don't address topics related to historically underreprensented

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, because formula dont have any bias.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, formula is a kind of fact.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, since it not have enough content
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Yes, because the formula provide the way to calculate those numbers, it convince people of how to do that

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all new content is backed up by a reliable source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, the article is all based on source.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, all sources is update to nowadays.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, there are more than 3 authors of the resources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they work as i check.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Not at all, the lead are over detailed, should increase more detailed.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are few spelling errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, but need more information in the content about possession value in other league.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media, My peer don't add any 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?

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? Yes, the author provide 3 reliable sources.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? The sources is not enough for the article, thus the author may list more resources.
 * 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? Nope, i think the possession value is built on his own style.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? No

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? I think the article need more revision.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It talks a new statistic, however, need more information in the content
 * How can the content added be improved? Add more content about possession value in other league. How those value can be used in some way.

Overall evaluation
A great lead, introduction were over detailed. Lack of enough content, add more content would be helpful to build a complete article