User:Ixamaris Cruz/Design/PMG2020UPRC 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

 * Reviewing Ixamaris cruz work
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: . User:Ixamaris Cruz/Design

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * The Lead has not been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer.
 * The Lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic.
 * The Lead is mostly concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * The content is relevant to the topic and added up-to-date. Last edit was on October 11 2020.
 * Content includes many design types.
 * The article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps and it address topics related to history.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * The content is added neutral there is no manipulation or personal information.
 * The content does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Not all new content is backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.
 * I personally did not see sources thorough - i.e.
 * Most of the sources are current and open.
 * Some links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Content is well-written, concise, clear, and easy to read.
 * The content added has no grammatical or spelling errors.

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


 * The article could use more images related to the topic.
 * The two images are well-captioned.
 * Not all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * The images are not really laid out in a visually 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?
 * 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?