User:Jordanwunderli/Sumo/U1089327 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) Jordan W. (Jordanwunderli)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Jordanwunderli/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead on the general topic of Sumo has not been updated to reflect the content but for this particular article, I do not believe the lead needs to be updated because the information added by my peer is more detail based and does not change the course of the article itself in a significant manner.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The lead on the article of Sumo is very well written and includes a clear introductory, descriptive sentence.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, for most information provided on the main article of the topic.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Not that I could detect.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? In my opinion, I believe the lead is very concise and does a great job of introducing each piece of information on Sumo but does not dive too much into the detail.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? The content added by my peer is definitely relevant to the Sumo article in addressing the attire worn and some of the reasoning and uses behind this clothing, however, I do wish there was more information provided at least up to this point.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? To my knowledge in reviewing my peer's short draft, I believe the information provided is up to date as far as what is known currently about the clothing involved in Sumo.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I believe there is content missing and I found several areas where my peer might be able to add more information.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? For the most part, I found the draft of added content neutral, however I think there are a few places where this can be improved. For example, in mentioning the description of "foreigner's hair," I believe a bit of opinion is expressed when referring to the texture and difficulty of the topknot hairstyle for "foreigner's."
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I did not find this through the content draft.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I do not believe so.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content added, in my opinion, simply works to provide more information about a key characteristic of the overall topic of Sumo.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Most of the information is backed by a secondary source but the reliability is somewhat concerning because most of the sources are not scholarly about Sumo.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I believe some of the sources could be more thorough.
 * Are the sources current? The sources are more current than perhaps other information that is available and my peer does a great job of maintaining this relevancy.
 * 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? The content added is certainly concise and presented well but can be a bit difficult to read in particular sentences such as when referring to the wax that is used in Sumo wrestler's hair. For this example, the flow of the sentence and wording can be improved.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There were not any spelling errors that I could detect but the grammar can be improved in a few parts such as when describing why Sumo wrestlers wear Muwashi.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The organization is clear and easy to follow.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media (There were no images that I saw added by my peer, neither in the rough draft nor on the main Sumo article).


 * 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. (The draft I reviewed was adding new information to an-already-existing article).'''


 * 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? The content added has definitely improved the quality of the article overall by providing critical information that was lacking before. The article feels a bit more complete from the addition of this content.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Some of the strengths include the overall organization of the addition and some of the information added I believe is vital to the article itself such as elaborating on the hairstyle, reasoning behind the attire, advantages of wearing the clothing, etc.
 * How can the content added be improved? As mentioned, I believe the grammar in some areas can be improved and I think overall, more information can be added. The rough draft is rather short in length.