User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy/Yonna95 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? (Ivana Yizhang)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No not yet
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Not yet
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not yet
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Not yet
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No

Lead evaluation
Waiting for a Lead to be created...but other information has been developed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy has uploaded a case.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Content that is missing are Definition, History of art therapy, Schizophrenia, Art therapy and Depression.

Content evaluation
Add information to the blank Headers such as Definition History of Art therapy etc.

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? No, I think the viewpoints that are there are represented very well.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
Tone and balance is very good no persuasion anyway.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


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

Sources and references evaluation
The User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy sources and references are accurate and useful for her Article but needs more sources she only has 4.

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? Yes

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article is well done and includes Art Therapy instructions and outcomes of one particular participant

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes its one of the participants work.
 * Are images well-captioned? Sort of...its missing the year it was possibly published but when you click it your able to see everything.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I think this one particular image does
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Images and media evaluation
If its possible to upload at least 2-3 more images and a video that is instructional base of Art therapy? I think these will help explore the article more in depth and draw more viewers to it.

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? Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? The list only contains 4 sources, and yes.
 * 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? Sort of
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Not really

New Article Evaluation
Find a way to link other articles to your article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Not yet
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The strengths of the article is art therapy instructions and cases, you do not really see that in Wikipedia
 * How can the content added be improved? Filling out the missing paragraphs under the headers.

Overall evaluation
Hopefully the User:Ivana Yizhang Li/Art therapy finish uploading the missing information.