User:Glebbos/Left 4 Dead 2/Spencerqolney Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Glebbos


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Glebbos/sandbox


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Left 4 Dead 2

Lead

 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, however the introductory sentence is unchanged from the original article.
 * 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? Not as far as I can tell.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is appropriately detailed for an article of this size, however it is lacking a couple citations (The sentence "The sequel to...in July 2013." has citations in the original article but not your draft.)

Content

 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? I cannot seem to find any of the sources posted to your bibliography incorporated into your drafted article.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, the content in the bibliography is.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, the content is written in a neutral tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not as far as I can tell.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Once again, I am unable to find any discernible differences or added content in your sandbox draft from the original article.

Sources and References

 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * 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.) Not as far as I can tell.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No.

Overall impressions

 * How can the content added be improved? Again, I was unable to find any discernible differences in the sandbox draft from the original article other than some sources in the user's bibliography. I was unable to find this sources incorporated into the article. I am not sure if this is a technical error on my part; if so, my apologies.