User:Ilesk/Education in Quebec/Majaterzic8 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)
 * Ilesk, Wangs161
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * User:Ilesk/Education in Quebec

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * NA
 * 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?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * NA
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise, I would add more about what school boards are, their purpose, repercussions of removing them and positives

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?
 * Yes, as I mentioned above I think it would be interesting to compare different provinces school boards and why removing school boards is so big

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?
 * Describing why they decided to terminate the school boards and what they hope it'll do
 * Add the importance of having community members and parents, etc.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No - add some citations for your date of termination, etc. :)
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * NA
 * Are the sources current?
 * NA
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * NA

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?
 * No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * N/A not yet organized into sections

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * NA
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * NA
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * NA

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?
 * NA
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * NA
 * 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?
 * NA
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?
 * NA

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * It is a really good idea to touch on the termination of school boards. I would cite other wiki pages on school boards to allow readers to get a full understanding
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * It is super relevant and a good topic! I think it'll be super interesting to read and write :)
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * Adding more info!

Overall evaluation
It is a really good start! Once you add more to the article I think it'll be great.