User:Julianajoy4/NorthernAttitude/Lcastillo4 Peer Review

General info
Username: Julianajoy4
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Julianajoy4/NorthernAttitude?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

This lead section does a great job of being concise. It provides an overview of the song "Northern Attitude" by Noah Kahan and covers the important aspects of it like the release date, album, songwriting, production, and the duet with Hozier. This lead have been updated to reflect the new content about the song, including its release date, album details, and the duet version with Hozier. This lead section has an introductory sentence that describes the articles topic and states the details of the song and what the article will be about. This section does not include any information that is not present in the article and does not produce any new points that are not visited throughout the article. Overall, this is a very clear and concise lead that is very well written and well done.

Since this article is about a specific song, the content is extremely relevant to the topic because it describes all the information that went into the production of this song, along with the meaning it holds and the different elements of the song. The content added is up-to-date because all the sources are either published or updated during 2024 (this year). Additionally, as learned from the article, this song is new and was just recently released, so the sources and content are all up-to-date and does not contain any old information. From reading through this article, I don't believe there is any missing content. Everything included in this article is explained well and, especially from my lack of knowledge of the song prior to reading this article, I feel like I learned a lot. With that being said, I don't think there is any content that doesn't belong because it all relates directly to the song. Although this article doesn't deal with any Wikipedia equity gaps, it does address a topic that you could possibly consider being related to a historically underrepresented group: which is celebrities from Appalachia and their success in the industry by making songs like this one.

The content in this article is neutral. This Wikipedia article presents factual information about the song and its background, themes, and production process. Especially after looking through the sources that were used to produce the information written in this article, there is nothing that seems to be promoting any particular viewpoint, artist, or interpretation over another. Additionally, the article covers various aspects of the song and this article provides the reader with all the elements needs to create a balanced presentation without veering towards a specific perspective. There are no claims or statements made in this article that are very biased towards a specific position. For example, the information that is provided in this article is very similar (will mention that it is summarized well and does not look to be plagiarized) to what is stated in the sources and is presented objectively and this allows readers to form their own opinions on the song.

The content is backed up by sources from publishers that are reliable and are credited for their little-to-no-bias writing. For example, one of the websites used is the "Sound Cafe" and this website is known for giving authentic and trustworthy descriptions of music. Although a lot of these sources that were used in this article are not peer-reviewed or scholarly, I think they do a good job of providing unbiased information. Although, in order to enhacne the credibility of this article, adding one or two additional scholarly or reliable journals/books would make this article very credible and reliable. Also, all of the links work, so that is a good sign that the sources are up-to-date, current, and still contain relevant information.

Overall, the organization of the article is good. This article is organized well and demonstrates a sort of clarity and readability. For example, going from the lead section to the "background" of the song, and then to the information of the different elements of the song is a really great way to organize it because it really shows that there was a lot of thought put into how readable it was going to be for viewers of the article and how to capture every element/aspect of the song and make it clear and coherent. Another thing I will mention is that this article does a great job of delineating every section and creating seamless transitions that really help elevate the content.

Although there are no images or media in this article, there is a chart that reveals all the quick facts of the song and that is super helpful for the reader because that is a small aspect that makes the article more engaging and accessible to readers who also want to know the quick facts as well as the different aspects of the song. This is a super great piece that was added to the article that makes it look more appealing, but I definitely think that adding images and media would be a great way to enhance the understanding of the song, who the artist is, and really connect and engage the reader to the topic.

This article is supported by 2-3 sources that come from trusted and reliable publishers, but they are not peer-reviewed journals or books. Although this article doesn't have peer-reviewed, I don't think it takes away from the credibility because 1) this is a very new topic because the song was just recently published, and 2) it is not an academic topic. Overall, I think this is a really well done article with only a few adjustments that need to be made in order to enhance the article. I think there is a lot of great content and it is a great topic to add to Wikipedia.