User:Gbarajas/Anna Tsouhlarakis/Yeseniacx 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? (gbarajas)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Anna Tsouhlarakis

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise and to the point.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, the user talks about the artists' life and relevant work.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? It seems like all the info provided is up to date, but I found other websites that shows updated current work. http://naveeks.com
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? More recent content of the artist is missing and some information on the website can strengthen the editors page.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, there is no sides of why she is an amazing artist.
 * 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? NO

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, the editor has cited all her information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Not all, I could not gain access to one of the sources. #7 https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/works-renowned-contemporary-native-artists-national-museum-american-indian-new-york-june-2
 * Check a few links. Do they work? No. Also, I was not sure how to check the book source.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, but it can be reviewed a bit and changed here and there.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes, a few grammatical error and the sentences can be structured by being straight- forward.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, different topics are separated and can be easily found.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? n/a
 * 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? No images have been added to the article

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, it does.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Yes, there is not too much websites referenced.
 * 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? Yes, there is enough info to give a brief description of the Artist.
 * 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? Yes, there was no information at first of the artist and the editor is bringing awareness to her work in Native America art.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The paragraphs are short and can be read quickly.
 * How can the content added be improved? Add more recent work from the artist, because she is still alive and creating more masterpieces.
 * Review your grammar, I recommend using grammarly or asking another peer.

Overall evaluation
The wiki article looks amazing, just a few more reviews and to me it looks like someone working for wikipedia uploaded. Good job on collecting information and on the rough draft!