User:Iphigenia in Tauris/Elpinice/Wwustudent712 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Iphigenia in Tauris


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Iphigenia in Tauris/Elpinice
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Elpinice

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

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?

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?

Yes, definitely. They have really fleshed out the article.


 * Is the content added up-to-date?

Yes, there are sources from the past few years.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Nope, everything is relevant to the topic.


 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Yes, the article is about a notable Greek woman which isn't nearly as reported on as Greek men as a whole, and notes her accomplishments.

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?

The added content is all relevant and neutral, it doesn't appear to have a certain bias.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

Yes.


 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)

Yes, there are some reputable sources added.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

Yes.


 * Are the sources current?

As much as they can be.


 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

The sources are either books and ancient literature, so they have good sources.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

Yes, all added content is concise and easy to follow.


 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?

No, it has good conventions.


 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Yes, they added section headers that break the article down well.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

Yes, they are relevant and high-quality.


 * Are images well-captioned?

Yes, they're straight and to the point.


 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

Yes.


 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Yes.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?

Absolutely, the article looks way better than before and has been developed and organized.


 * What are the strengths of the content added?

The article is easier to read than it was before with the new sections added and the writing is very clear.


 * How can the content added be improved?

I would say maybe adding another source or two, but overall it looks great so just added more information would be great (as noted, they are planning on adding more to one of their sections.