User:KoreanArtHistory../Sin-Yeoseong- 신여성- New Women/Morwenna782 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

KoreanArtHistory


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KoreanArtHistory../Sin-Yeoseong-_%EC%8B%A0%EC%97%AC%EC%84%B1-_New_Women?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? -Yes, there is an Introduction section that provides detail on the topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? --No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? -- The information provided is more of a background for the article that will follow.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? --It is concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?                                                                                              --Yes, the topic is on a feminist article, and all the information that follows is about the background, influence, and critique of the publication, which is all relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?                                                                                                             --Yes, it appears to be up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?                                                               -- No, all content seems to belong.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? --Yes...(?).

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? --Yes, the content is neutral and informative.
 * 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, the content is informative in tone.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? --Yes, each paragraph contains citations for the statements.
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.) --Yes, the content is accurate to the sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? --Yes, the sources are informative and relate to the topic.
 * Are the sources current? --Yes, the sources are current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? --The sources seem to be written by people with Korean names.
 * 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.)                                                        -- The sources provided are reliable.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? --Yes, the links in the citations work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?                                             --In the Content Background section, in the sentence starting with "The Japanese government systematically..." the wording, "...this idea in the official women's idea after..." on confusing. I don't really understand what you mean.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?                                                          --I believe the magazine title should be italicized, and some of the mentions of the name are not italicized (also for the mention of Tonga ilbo in the 'Critique' section). In the Content and Theme section, the first sentence has a typo- 'dorms' is meant to be 'forms', and 'short stories' is written twice, once at the beginning of the list and again at the end. I believe 'daughter in law", as you have it written in the Content Background section, in the middle of the paragraph, should be hyphenated. There seems to be a typo in the Tongo ilbo sentence: "...pointed out in hist article...".
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?                                                                                                                                                       -- Yes, the content is very easy to follow. It is informative and gives an very good background on the topic.

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 for 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? --There are 6 sources that support this article.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? -- The sources relate well to the topic, but also seem to include some variety.
 * 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? --The links are within citations at the end of paragraphs.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? --Yes, it has. The additions provide accurate information on the topic.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? --The detail regarding the background of the magazine and what spurred its creation is valuable, and the public perception is also important to consider, which makes the additions valuable for the page.
 * How can the content added be improved? --Fixing the typos and wording would add clarity.