User:Jessssk/Saar de Swart: she/her, Dutch, 1861-1951/Basti2425 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? Jessssk
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Jessssk/Saar de Swart: she/her, Dutch, 1861-1951

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
Your opening paragraph could be the lead of an article, however since you have limited information, I think you should add a summarizing sentence at the top to act as your lead.

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? Maybe some missing?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes that's the assignment

Content evaluation
I think if you can find it you should try to include more information, however I see a lot of the information available is in Dutch so that may be hard.

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?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Your bibliography is confusingly laid out, also I don't think we're supposed to cite other wiki pages. You can highlight a word and click the link icon to the left of Cite and that links the wiki page without citing it.

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? 1?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? needs lead and headers

Organization evaluation
You should add a lead sentence or two, and headers for sections such as career, personal life and death, even if the sections are short.

Maybe add wikilinks onto place names

I think you should add a comma after : Corstianus Hendrikus de Swart (I'm not completely sure of this but it sounds right in my head)

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images 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? Yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Not sure
 * 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? No
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? No

New Article Evaluation
I think you should try to find more sources, add sections with headings, and add wikilinks to other articles.

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?

Overall evaluation
Overall, the language is clear and informative, however I think it is lacking in information. I understand that most of the information on her is in Dutch so unless you speak Dutch it may be difficult. Even if this is in fact all the information available you should create sections and add headers. The bibliography needs some work there are two lists and one row of numbers and some of the numbers have no citation.