User:Jkrulicki/Arthur Erickson/Didara M 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? Jkrulicki
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Jkrulicki/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, Lead has a been updated accordingly.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it is concise and informative.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, it includes the architect's most notable achievements.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, everything mentioned is further discussed in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Lead is concise and straightforward.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, it is contains details about Erickson's life, architectural style, as well as notable achievements and legacy.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, everything is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The content added is relevant and belongs there, some information is to be further developed.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, every section in the article is from the neutral point-of-view.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, everything in the article is neutral.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, everything is equally represented.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, none of the sections is written in a way to persuade a reader in anything.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, just in-text citations needed.
 * 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, they all work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it is easy to follow.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, everything is grammatically correct.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, it is logically organized and represented equally.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Not yet.
 * 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?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * 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?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, the article is more complete, detailed and adds relevant information.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? It expands on the architect's modernist style, his passion toward arts and cultures, as well as his approach to the design in a very informative and concise way.
 * How can the content added be improved? In-text citations and images.