User:JEMGC/Washington Trails Association/Emilyngu3 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User:JEMGC


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JEMGC/Washington_Trails_Association?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Washington Trails Association

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes! The original article's Lead was only 1 sentence long, and the sandbox draft Lead has added sentences that encompass the added sections of the new article.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead includes an introductory sentence that describes the sections of the article's topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead includes the basic values of the organization, as well as the locations of its offices.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise, while still providing the information that is necessary to the reader to understand what the article is about.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I think it would be nice to add a box on the right side(idk what its called but a lot of Wikipedia articles have it), that have basic information such as the founder, where the organization was founded, when the organization was founded etc. Basically just easily accessible to the reader.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No

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

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
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * 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.)
 * Yes
 * 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
 * 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, the sections are easy to follow

Images and Media
Does the organization have a logo that you could add?