User:Isaiahskeete/Hybrid vehicle/Jirwin1011 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? Isaiahskeete
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Hybrid vehicle

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the lead has been updated to match the peer's new content
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead introduces the topic and briefly explains it
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, the lead hints at the content that will be touched on throughout the article
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, the lead includes extra information that is not later touched on
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead does not contain too much detail

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Most of the content added to the article relates back to the original topic
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, most of the content if from recent years, some of the information is a bit out of date but that could be due to the information online not being up to date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I don't believe that there is necessarily content missing, but some of the content presented in a bit excessive

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, all added content is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There is none that is super evident and in my opinion there is no heavy bias at all
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, I believe all viewpoints are equally represented throughout the article
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the information added to the article is all neutral and not persuasive at all in my opinion

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Most content that has been added is backed by a reliable secondary source
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, in my opinion the sources do reflect the available information
 * Are the sources current? Yes, majority of the sources are current
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, majority of the links that I checked work

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? in my opinion the content added could have been written a little more clear, and easy to read
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not any that I could find
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? I believe that the information was somewhat organized clearly, and it could have been organized a little more clearly, but does reflect the major topics

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, all images have sufficient explanations accompanying them
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, they all meet the guidelines
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, images are not all placed in one section of the content, they are distributed in an appealing way

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

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, the content added provides additional information that the article was lacking originally, leading it to be closer to completion now
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The content added improves the overall understanding of what "Hybrid Vehicles" actually are, as in my case I knew little to nothing about the content added to the article before reading it
 * How can the content added be improved? The content itself is really good, I just believe that rewording some sections to sound a little more fluent would improve the flow of the article