User:Jhidde/User:Karcwiki/sandbox/Jhidde 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? Karcwiki
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Karcwiki/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * no, the content currently in the sandbox are minor edits that don't yet have formal structure
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * yes, it covers how Li got her start and how she began gaining a following, as well as her current following
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * yes, additionally she has already added youtube and social media links to the main Li Ziqi article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * very concise, shows the necessary information and nothing else

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * yes, it includes social media/youtube information as well as how she got her start and how her statistics are today
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * yes, the references are no older than late 2018, and two articles from 2020 are included
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * not necessarily, as there isn't a lot of information but the information given is all relevant and concise to the topic

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no, most of the information has solely to do with numbers
 * 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, again, the information is mostly numbers and concrete facts found within the references

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes, i was actually surprised about how many sources there are that all point to the same fact/topic, very well reinforced
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes, all sources are relevant and contribute to the information presented in the sandbox
 * Are the sources current?
 * yes, late 2018-2020
 * 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, it flows like a wikipedia article should and is in passive voice with good spelling and grammar
 * 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, there isn't much information, but it would fit nicely into the career section of her article

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, supported by 5 sources
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * yes, all the sources are from news outlets both domestic and abroad and have working links that lead to good looking sites
 * 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, what happens with some smaller celebrities on wikipedia is they are tragically underrepresented, and there usually isn't much information about them at all, so any additions that come from reliable sources and are complete articles are positive additions to the article
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * accurate subscription/popularity numbers as of march 2020, as well as objective reporting on her impact on chinese culture and international popularity
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * for the scope of the material, the information is relevant and backed up by good reliable sources, perhaps some expansion on her rise to popularity, but that is likely already covered in the main article, so no worries