User:KevDuguay/Suburb/Rnguyenhist463uo Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

Due to the influx of people in these surburban areas, the amount of shopping centers began to increase as suburban America took shape. These often large buildings full of multiple stores, and services, were being used for more than shopping, but as a place of leisure and a meeting point for those who lived within suburban America at this time. Shopping for different goods and services in one spot without having to travel far and to multiple store locations, helped to keep shopping centers a component of these newly designed suburbs. These centers thrived offering goods and services to the growing populations in suburban America. In 1957, 940 shopping centers were built and this number more than doubled by 1960 to keep up with the demand of these densely populated areas.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? KevDuguay
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:KevDuguay/Suburb

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?: No
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?: N/A
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?: N/A
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?: N/A
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?: N/A

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?

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?: Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?: No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?: No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?: No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?: Yes, but only one
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?: No, we need more scholarly literature on the topic. The only resource cited is the textbook.
 * Are the sources current?: Yes
 * 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?: 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?: N/A, only one paragraph

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?: N/A
 * Are images well-captioned?: N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?: N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?: N/A

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?: N/A
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?: N/A
 * 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?: N/A
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?: N/A

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?:
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?: I bolded some changes that should be made due to grammatical or spelling errors. "Shopping centers" was capitalized in one instance where it didn't need to be, for example. I also recommend adding more sources so that the content added reflects additional perspectives. We also want to avoid the potential of closely paraphrasing. I will also say that I'm not sure where you intend to place this paragraph, something that would help me formulate feedback. I'm suspecting it's going into be the "North America" section under "housing," but I'm not sure.