User:Klc2019/Climate change in the Caribbean/Brieannaprasad 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) Klc2019
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Klc2019/Climate change in the Caribbean

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? yes, the lead also is informative and shows the main point if the article.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes it does
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? yes, the lead is broken down giving me an idea of what the the sections will be about f
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? yes it does
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is relatively concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes the content is relevant as well as informative
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Semi, the sources cites are from 2011-2012
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think all the content within this article is relevant to their topic

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? yes very neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No I did not read any heavily biased statements or sentences.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Underrepresented, more information could be added
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it is just factual

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes they do have reliable sources
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they describe what they are pulling out out every source along with why is it useful
 * Are the sources current? They are from 2011-2012
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes there links work

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is concise, clear and easy to read however could use a lot more information
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I did not point out any errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Not yet, they just have information pulled out from sources but the article has not yet been broken into sections

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are no images
 * Are images well-captioned? no images
 * 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?
 * 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? It still needs to come together more in order to determine this question
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Very informative by providing examples and the content is balanced
 * How can the content added be improved? By adding more information to inform the reader and draw them in more

==== Overall evaluation ''- Overall I like the article and feel as if the information being added is a very good asset and will help to strengthen the overall article. In my opinion however, I would personally add more information and potentially try and find more recent dated sources.'' ====