User:Jaunarra/Of One Blood (novel)/RavenaWolf Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Jaunarra
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Jaunarra/Of One Blood (novel)

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? --Somewhat
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? --Not really. It starts with the summary, not much else.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? --Not particularly
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? --no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? --I'm not sure.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? --The little that is there is relevant.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? --As far as I can tell.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? --There is content missing, but that is because the assignment is not complete.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? -- As far as I can tell.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? --No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? --There are a few things that need to be hammered out and added to make some of the sections more informative.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? --The plot summary does have some things, such as the last sentence, that is not meant to be informative but persuasive.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? --As far as I can tell.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? --There could be more sources, but what is there now is acceptable.
 * Are the sources current? --Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? --There are no links, only addresses.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? --It certainly is concise.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? --There are some grammatical problems with commas and FANBOYS, but nothing overly concerning.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? --yes

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


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

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? --As far as I know
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? --There are only 3. They could use some more.
 * 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? --Not really
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? --It does not.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? --It could be more weel-rounded than it is now
 * What are the strengths of the content added? --The summary is concise and not overwhelming
 * How can the content added be improved? --More sections for better comprehension can help the overall article

Overall evaluation

 * It's a good start, but I would recommend moving the characters list to the summary. Fix the small grammatical errors in the article and link some existing wiki articles to the page to make it more legit. That can only help. ~