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

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?
 * Perfect
 * 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?
 * The first three sentences are excellent, the last two may best serve the article leading the research section.

Lead evaluation
You have a lot of information to synthesize into a small lead here, I think you are on the right track but could focus it in a bit more.

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
You have discovered a great deal of information on the subject and it all serves to build a background of him. It seems like you found a lot of information from your sources, so much so that it may be worth going back and ensuring that all information included is relevant to his life and career. I found that the section on his work at the university included some accomplishments that were impressive at the university but may not be as useful for a world audience.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * None
 * 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
Your article does an excellent job of simply presenting the facts you have researched without putting any spin on them. Great work!

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, several of your citations give confirming information to each other.
 * 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, but I fear that they could be inaccessible to someone outside of OSU due to the proxy links. If the articles have a public facing link I would try to replace the links.

Sources and references evaluation
Once again, you have found an impressive amount of research on his life. If possible, it would be interesting to have a little more information on his work and potentially some more examples of it being used by governments or other academics to conduct change.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, within each section
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * None apparent
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes and no. It is subdivided well but the organization of the sections could be made more fluid.

Organization evaluation
Your writing is excellent within each section. From a reader's perspective, I think it would be helpful to reorganize the article to reflect aspects of the career with chronological subdivisions in each section. I have found that a lot of articles will organize major parts of careers (education, research, etc) chronologically and then include any additional information at the end.

Images and Media
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?

Images and media evaluation
It can be a challenge to find fair use images for these subjects, but if you can locate anything for the sub-topics it may be useful. For example, https://ccsearch.creativecommons.org/photos/b9f2d5c8-e1e8-4c53-8ed4-db4138b6e2a3 is an image of the main building at Makerere that could be used in your section on it.

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?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * No
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * Yes

New Article Evaluation
You have done great work gathering sources and writing an article. I think the only way to improve from here is to lock down the formatting of the article. There is a good template included in the editor (although it can be really awful when you paste it into the article) that can help give an idea for how to format. I have included it at the bottom of this reply so you don't accidentally break your sandbox article (like I did) when you paste it in.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
Your article is in a great place from an information perspective and just needs a little more work to be ready for publishing. Well done!