User:I am Osigwe/1993 Nigerian presidential election/Nilsuc 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
I am reviewing I am Osigwe's work. The link is at: User:I am Osigwe/sandbox

Lead evaluation
The writer did not add on to the lead. The lead is taken from the already existing article. The existing lead does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. The lead does not include a brief description of the article's major sections. The lead does not include information that is not present in the article. The lead is concise.

Content
Guiding questions:

Content evaluation
The content added is relevant to the topic and is up to date. I think there can be more information added on the significance of these elections. Moreover, after each section topic sentences can be added to serve to introduce the reader to the context of the upcoming paragraph. If there are any controversies regarding this election, this could be a nice section to add to your article. Other than these suggestions, the content added by the writer does belong to the article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:

Tone and balance evaluation
The content added is neutral and no claim appears to be heavily biased toward a particular position. The views do not overrepresent or underrepresent any viewpoints and therefore the content added does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position. However, the article misses the scholarly discussions and debates regarding the topic, which would be where these viewpoints would be reflected.

Sources and references evaluation
The new content is not backed by reliable secondary source of information. The article in its current form does not include citations and does not refer to the available literature on the topic as there is no discussion of scholarly articles.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The content is concise, clear and easy to read. The content does not have grammatical or spelling errors. The content is well-organized and broken into sections that reflect the major points. However, I think there needs to be a section reflecting the significance of the elections as well as the controversies and scholarly debates on it.

Images and media evaluation
The writer did not add images or media.

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.

New Article Evaluation
This is not a new article.

Overall evaluation
The content added has improved the overall quality of the article as beforehand there was only a lead and a section on results. The article is somewhat more complete, however it still is missing information. The added content is stronger than the existing information on the article as there are important sections containing information on the legacy of the election as well as the post-election events. There are more details provided on the election results as well as primaries and nominations. The detail provided in the content added is a major strength, however the information needs to be backed by sources. There definitely needs to be references on scholarly articles and debates, which is currently missing. There is a lack of information on why this specific election has been crucial for Nigeria, therefore elaborating on the significance can also make the article stronger. The lead has not been changed from its old form - I believe the writer will need to add information to the lead regarding the upcoming sections and that they will refer to. Moreover, the sections will need to be updated with topic sentences to introduce the reader to the section.