User:JBonz/Cell theory/AudraPlattsburgh 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? Jason
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:JBonz/Cell theory

Lead
Guiding questions:


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

Lead evaluation
You should add a couple sentences dicussing what it is you are actually going to be talking about through out the article

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Some of the sources for the article are out of date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think there is good content.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Content evaluation
The content is good, there are a lot of sections.

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
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
The topic was kept neutral with no biases and no opinions

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? No a lot of the sources are out of date and not relevant
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes the sources have multiple authors
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes

Sources and references evaluation
I would add more relevant sources that are up to date with the last couple of years.

Organization
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? I would go back and look at some of the commas, I think you have some where they are not needed
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes there are multiple sections with good content

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned? No
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? No
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?No

Images and media evaluation
I would add some images to go along with what you are talking about.

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? 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? Yes
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? no
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved? I would add some more up to date sources and check some of the grammatical things over with the use of commas. I would also add a section at the top outlining what the following sections you have are talking about.

Overall evaluation
Over all the article looks good. you could definitely add some photos to help make it more interesting and get more relevant sources.