User:Gracie15/Online Gender Based Violence/Lkd36 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)
 * Gracie15---Online Gender Based Violence
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Gracie15/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * I think you can add in a sentence or two at the end to reflect what is being discussed in the article.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, there is a clear definition of what online gender based violence is and how it is conducted.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, I would maybe include a little description at the end of that lead paragraph just to show which sections you will be discussing (especially because it is a new article).
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * I don't believe so.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is pretty detailed, in how online gender based violence is conducted and how it perpetuates. There is one phrase where it says "among other things" that I would maybe replace with something more specific to the topic.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content is all seems relevant.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * I think so for the most part.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think so. The content that is added seems all relevant and crucial to understanding the topic.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, the content is neutral and informative (rather taking on a bias on topics).
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I am not sure about the claim that women are more prone to online gender based violence, whether that is a stereotype or based on conducted research.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I think there could be a section maybe on male representation and how stereotypical it is that many males do not go through as much online gender based violence?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * I do not think so, it is very informative in its entirety.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, there were sources for each paragraph of information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * I believe so; they do reflect the available literature out there on this particular topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, most of the sources are within the last few years.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the structure is very organized and very clear. I can understand it and the topic.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not find any.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * I think so, there are relevant sections throughout the information.

Images and Media---N/A there were no images added
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?

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, there are severable reliable sources.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * I think there are quite a bit of sources and they do represent the 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?
 * Yes, I would maybe turn those subheadings and headings into more bolder lettering, so there's not any confusion.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * Yes, at the end, there is a link to one of the controversies around gender based violence.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * I believe so. The information added would be very useful to the article in general.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * I think there are clear sections outlining each form of violence and the additional smaller sections (such as the international/United States and impacts).
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I think the content was really good. I can't think of anything else really to improve the content, except maybe adding perhaps more sources.