User:Jezreel.bodley23/Meghalaya/Sampriti.Saxena 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?
 * I'm reviewing Jezreel's (Jezreel.bodley23) additions to the "Meghalaya" article.
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Additions: User:Jezreel.bodley23/sandbox
 * Original article: Meghalaya

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * The lead has not been updated to reflect the new content, however there is a clear introduction for the section that is helpful.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead does follow these requirements quite well and offers a concise summary of the state.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead touches upon most of the article's major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The lead includes a paragraph about an archaeological discovery and its relation to a climate change event, but the article does not elaborate upon this later.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is quite clear and concise.

Lead evaluation
Overall, the lead is effective. It clearly summarises the article and provides information on nearly every major section. With Jezreel's contribution, the section (Culture and Society) may need a sentence or two to summarise the new subsection. I would also consider the placement of the last paragraph in the article's lead, as it does not necessarily contribute a lot to the lead (but I'm not sure we have to address this with our projects).

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * The content added is relevant to the topic and offers insight into an important element of Meghalaya's society that has not yet been explored in the article.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * All of the sources used are quite recent for the most part, and so the content added will be quite up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think the content is missing anything. The only thing that I was unsure about including would be the role of foundations in civil society, as the sources seem to focus on NGOs more.

Content evaluation
I think this content will be a great addition to the article, and it looks like the sources offer a pretty comprehensive view on the topic.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * The content up so far maintains a neutral tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * None of the claims appear to be heavily biased, rather they are pretty factual statements.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No viewpoints are over or underrepresented in the content.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favour of one position or away from another?
 * The content does not attempt to persuade the reader on way or another.

Tone and balance evaluation
The content is very factual and remains neutral. There are no viewpoints or biases being pushed forward.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes. All of the new content is cited from a journal article.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources listed in the bibliography seem to offer a pretty comprehensive view on the topic of civil society in Meghalaya.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are current for the most part with the oldest source being from 2006.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All the links for the new content work, and other links in the original article also appear to be working.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources all seem to be good, reliable secondary sources of information for this article. There is a mix of academic sources and information from the Indian government. Certain statements in the main article are missing citations, but all of the new content is cited.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The content added is clear and concise. It offers a good amount of detail on the topic without being hard to follow.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * The last sentence of the introduction to the section has a question mark at the end of it that I don't think it should have. Other than that, the grammar and spellings look fine.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The content added is well-organised with the structure breaking down quite a large topic into easily understandable sections.

Organization evaluation
Overall, the content is concise and neutral. The way the subsection is structured will make it easy to read and understand.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * The content will be an important addition to this article, as it will provide much needed context on civil society in Meghalaya. This context is helpful in understanding the political dynamics of the state, as well as its relationship with the central government.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The content appears to be well researched. Based on the outline, it will be structured in such a way that it provides detailed information on the topic, while staying neutral and easy to follow.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * The only thing I would think about is including foundations, as I'm not sure the research cited provides information on their role in civil society in Meghalaya.

Overall evaluation
The additions to the article will be helpful in better understanding the political and social dynamics at play in Meghalaya, and will definitely be a valuable contribution to the main article. It seems to be shaping up quite well.