User:Kacart98/Postpartum psychosis/Dennyslimon10 Peer Review

General info
User:Kacart98
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kacart98/Postpartum_psychosis?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Postpartum psychosis

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.)

Lead

Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?  My peer has not added any new content to the Lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?  The Lead's introductory sentence is very well worded and informative.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?  Yes, the Lead does a very good job of giving a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?  No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?  The Lead is very concise and is not overly detailed. I think the Lead is very well done and easy to follow and understand.

Content

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?  My peer has not added any new content.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?  My peer has not added any new content, but the rest of the content in the article seems to be up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?  All of the content seems to be very informative and useful.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?  Yes, the article deals with postpartum psychosis which is a medical condition. It also has no definitive cause which is also interesting.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?  My peer has not added any new content. The rest of the content in the article seems to be neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?  I did not see any claims that appear heavily biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?  All of the viewpoints seem to be equally discussed.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?  My peer has not added any new content.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?  My peer has not added any new content.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)  The content in the article seems to accurately reflect the sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?  Yes, the sources are thorough.
 * Are the sources current?  The sources in the article seem to be current, some are even from 2021.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?  Yes, there are a total of 150 sources which is a good variety.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)  I think the sources used are all very good.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?  Yes, the few links I clicked on all worked.

Organization

Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?  My peer has not added any new content.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?  My peer has not added any new content. I did not see any grammatical errors throughout the rest of the article.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?  My peer has not added any new content.

Images and Media


 * No images or media were added by my peer.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?  My peer has not added any new content.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?  My peer has not added any new content.
 * How can the content added be improved? I think the organization of the article as a whole could use a few changes. For example, the "history" section could possibly be moved right after the Lead. Some words could also use a link like the work "paranoia".