User:Gcordova1/Instagrams effect on physical fitness/Vgs0208 Peer Review

General info
Gcordova1
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Gcordova1/Instagrams effect on physical fitness

Lead

 * There is no lead yet

Content

 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? - yes, the content added is relevant to the topic. I like that you give both sides of positive and negative effects.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? - Yes, the content added is up to date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - I think you have good content, but i feel like maybe you could add a section that is about solutions to what one can do when feeling like social media is influencing them in a negative way. It could make your article longer.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the content added neutral? the content has information that might be bias, so maybe provide sources after it so it doesn't seem like these are your thoughts.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? - On both the positive and negative sections there might be slight bias, but only because it sounds like your thoughts. If it is information, be sure to source it.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? - Both view points are covered well. I think you can add more information on the COVID-19 section and talk about other effects other than weight gain
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another ?- No, reading this doesn't push ideas to one side; just needs sources

Sources and References

 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? - No, I was only able to see 2 sources and i think there is a lot of information on your draft that didn't have a source and needs one.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) - yes, the sources does back up what you say, but i would try and find more sources for each section. Try having at least 2 more sources for each section; its better to rely on more sources and not just one.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? - yes, the sources are thorough and reflect on the topic you mention
 * Are the sources current? - The sources are from 2020, in my opinion, i think they are current and work fine for your topic
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? - I think nit does, but you can also find more
 * 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.) - Your sources are great, but if you do some more research on the SFSU library, you can fund a lot more! I recommend to go on their website and message a librarian to help you find articles(its really helpful!!)
 * Check a few links. Do they work? - yes, they work, but the second source needs more information because if you scroll down to your references, it mentions how its missing the date. make sure to correct that!

Organization

 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? - The content is clear and easy to read, if you add more information it would be better!
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? - i didn't come across some grammatical errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? - the content is broken down into sections and well organized. One thing I recommend doing is either making your section titles bolded or anything that will help them stand out to let the reader know its a new section

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is for 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?- You have 2 sources, but more is better and also make sure to add your sources after each sentence of information.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? -No, there is a lot more information than sources
 * 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? - I was bale to find the new sections, but it was blended into the information. Like said before, try bolding it.

Overall impressions

 * What are the strengths of the content added? - The strength is giving positive and negative affects and having relatable information
 * How can the content added be improved? - the article can improve by adding a lot more sources after each of your information. right now, it sounds like its more of your thoughts and you want this article to be more informative and less of what you think.