User:HistoryandLiterature/James P.M. Ntozi/Alyce26 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? HistoryandLiterature
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:HistoryandLiterature/James P.M. Ntozi

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * 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

Lead evaluation
The lead looks really good and gives me a good overview of Ntozi and the importance of his work.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No

Content evaluation
The content is very informative and gives me extensive information on Ntozi. I appreciated the inclusion of the book he wrote as an entire section (it really emphasized its importance).

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes
 * 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

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone is unbiased throughout. When the content discusses opinions Ntozi has, specifically in the "Controversy" section, you are clear that they are not facts, just his opinion.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
The sources all add to the legitimacy of the article's content.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * None that I could fins
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Mostly

Organization evaluation
The content is very well written and I could not find any major grammatical errors when reading. I do have some recommendations about how the article is structured. For the lead paragraph, I recommend not creating a section for it with the subject's name. The article itself is the subject's name, so the lead does not need to be under a designated section. I would take out the heading. I also recommend that you maybe reorganize the order of sections based on both importance and chronology. Personally, I would put the "education" section first or right after the "Research" section because it is the earliest information about him and schooling was the first thing he did. I would also move the "Personal Life" section to right after the "Distinguished Achievements" section to keep the more career focused sections grouped together.

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
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Exhaustive for the length of article and representative
 * 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?
 * Mostly
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * Yes

New Article Evaluation
All the criteria for a new article is included. I would just recommend removing the section header for the lead.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Extensive information about Ntozi and his work during different parts of his career, great grammar and compellingly written
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * restructuring the organization of content

Overall evaluation
The article looks great overall. This article is full of great information and includes the most content I've seen so far. I think there are just a few structural changes needed to complete the article. Amazing job!