User:Jganan01/Jason Garcia (artist)/Evill029 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? (provide username)
 * Jganan01/Jason Garcia (artist)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Jganan01/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * As of now, everything has been updated since February 18th, 2020. But so far, it reflects the most updated information about Jason Garcia.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the first sentence definitely introduces and describes the artist that the audience will be reading about. By stating where they are from, along with their titles as an artist, and their overall contribution to the Native American art, it really captures the general idea of Jason Garcia.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * They do by stating where they are from. In this case, Jason Garcia is from Santa Clara, New Mexico.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * In a way, he overall generalizes the recognition of the artist and in the article they go into the specifics. He doesn't reiterate necessarily, which is good, but nothing grand is in the lead that isn't in the article. An example is how in the lead, they talk about lithography, serigraphy, and etching as Jason Garcia's primary techniques, but doesn't go into detail about them in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, the latest date of Honors and Awards comes from 2018 and all the other resources seem up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, all content is belongs in the article.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, nothing seems biased or opinionated.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, they go straight and to the point with the biography, education, and the artworks.
 * 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, all the content seems to be from reliable secondary sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * 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?
 * I haven't noticed any so no.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, it is all organized by major topics.

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?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

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?
 * It is accurately representing the topic of the article
 * 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?
 * Yes, overall the article seems to be in the right path to be a very reliable article about Jason Garcia.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Concise facts about the artist and his artwork, detailed paragraphs of each artwork, the list of all honors and awards, the updated list of the exhibitions and collections, and a long list of reliable sources.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I am sure there can be some more bibliography added to him. Maybe more about his later life, since we see more of how he came to be an artist. This is just a suggestion so there can be more meat in the article.

Overall evaluation
Overall, this is good. A great rough draft. Good job.