User:Ilovemitski/LGBT culture in India/Mobeenb98 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? Ilovemitski
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Ilovemitski/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
I think you do a great job of adding to the first paragraph and creating a more visual representation of how the social culture/government views the LGBTQ+ community. I think adding something to the first sentence might help for a better flow, the first sentence in the lead starts off with a ruling rather than how the community is viewed in India in layman's terms.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
I think the content added does an amazing job of representing the role of media and how it correlates with the LGBTQ+ community within India. I think it was great that you added about what the community is fighting for an while maintaining a neutral scholarly tone.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
As mentioned above, the tone that you take in your content remains neutral and there is no bias that is evident. I think you did a good job of showing the injustice towards the LBGTQ+ community by stating the facts in a respectful yet neutral manner. There is no persuasion that can be sensed from the content.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


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

Sources and references evaluation
All the content is supported by citations which are evident within the paragraph. They reflect accurately and the links do work.

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 well organized and broken down. The only suggestion I can see that could potentially improve the edit would be to expand a bit more on how exactly the community has been burgeoned by virtual media.

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
Nice vivid picture that captures the article and is captioned as well!

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

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
Overall I really enjoyed reading your article, I think you did a great job of presenting the material in a non-bias tone and added great content to gets to the roots of struggle that the LGBTQ+ community is fighting against. Great job! I would added a bit more to lead if possible to provide a better flow to the wiki page but everything else looks great.