User:Kyyrxrax08/Women writers in Chinese literature/Yiming Alice Wang 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)Kyyrxrax08
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Kyyrxrax08/Women writers in Chinese literature

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

Lead evaluation
There is no lead in Kyyrxrax08's draft, I think Kyyrxrax08 continued writing on the original article.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The content added is relevant to the topic, including women writers and feminism, and several outstanding women writers in modern China. The content added is up-to-date. There is no content that is missing or content that does not belong. It address topics related to women writers in China which belongs to historically underrepresented population.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The content added is neutral, no claims that heavily biased toward a particular position. The content added describes women writers objectively and using secondary sources, does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All new content is backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. The sources were written in 21st century and written by several writers. The links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The content added is well-written, it is concise, clear, and easy to read. The content added have spelling errors in Eileen Zhang's paragraph, "he" was used to describe her. The content added well-organized, broken down into sections like introduction of famous women writers in modern China, related to 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?

Images and media evaluation
The article added photos of women writers that are mentioned, which enhance understanding of the topic. Images are well-captioned. All images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. They are very visually appealing, catchy for readers.

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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
Overall, the draft is a great job, including introductions of several women writers although it is not completed. One of the strengths of the content added is photos, which helps readers know the topics more. It can be improved by adding more secondary resources and expand the part of Women writers in Modern China (1940s). Also be careful to grammatical and spelling errors.