User:KeanuSalimi/Batay-Csorba Architects/Neve.Toth 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? KeanuSalimi
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:KeanuSalimi/Batay-Csorba Architects

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? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Somewhat
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Lead evaluation 5/5
This is a new wikipedia page without a prior page on this architectural firm. There is a concise opening sentence that is straight to the point and clear. The lead gives a good overview of what the firm focuses on, as well as provides the links to references after each sentence of information. Overall, the lead is short, yet contains the proper information needed. Something that could be added to improve the lead is perhaps an introduction to where these architects are originally from and why they are now in Toronto.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes and No

Content evaluation 3/3
I think it was beneficial to organize the layout with headings such as history, projects, and awards as well as subheadings. It was also helpful that links were added beside each project in order to find more information on it. The history portion is concise, but perhaps it would be beneficial to speak about the founding architects individually at some point and their upbringing and how they got to where they are now. For a stranger reading this wikipedia page, it may be confusing for them not knowing the founders' relationship with one another (married? Siblings? How did they meet?). So, maybe add a little bit of background story to them and their credentials.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not strongly biased
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not particularly
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Somewhat, just with one sentence though

Tone and balance evaluation 3/4
This is the only sentence that I think could slightly seem biased is- "With industry experience in Los Angeles, as well as thorough project and design experience from both founding partners, the firm brings forth a differed perspective on the unique architectural design progression in Canada". This is only because a claim is made without citing who says this statement or believes this statement.

Maybe it would be interesting to describe certain awards and their criteria in order to win them, since this could describe what this firm is potentially good at and why they won it without being biased and making claims on your own.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * 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

Sources and references evaluation 3/4
Since you often cite their official website because you need to link to their projects and profiles, this could be seen as an unreliable source because it is information written by the firm.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * 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

Organization evaluation 3/3
I like how the page is organized with headings and subheadings. It is written clearly and keeps a consistent format from start to finish.

Double check " Both Andrew and Jodi are widely renown architectural designers" because I am uncertain if it should be "renown" or "renowned", like world-renowned architects.

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
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Somewhat
 * 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? No

New Article Evaluation 3.5/4
There seems to be significant coverage on this topic. There could be more sources found that are not written by the firm in discussion, if possible. Maybe you should try and link your page to other wikipedia pages, perhaps to a specific architectural style they follow or by being a Canadian architect etc.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Concise, organized
 * How can the content added be improved? Somewhat

Overall evaluation 4/5
Overall, the additions have been valuable. The article was strong because it got to the point and was clearly organized. I think it would be beneficial to try and dig deeper to find more articles that are reliable and not written by the architectural firm itself. Also, the article will feel more complete once you add images.