User:Lainey.lheureux/Bernadette Jordan/Kassidystevens 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? Lainey.lheureux
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Lainey.lheureux/Bernadette Jordan

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? No.
 * 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? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? There is no lead.

Lead evaluation
There has been no addition of a lead on to this article, but what has been added into the sandbox may not be information that would necessarily need to go into the lead.

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.

Content evaluation
What has been put in to the sandbox is an interesting and useful piece of information, but there is only one thing to look at, so I think there could have been some more added.

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.

Tone and balance evaluation
The nature of the information in the sandbox is unbiased and appears to be purely factual.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? No.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Sources and references evaluation
I did not quite understand how the Prime Minister's letter about Rural Economic Development related to Jordan's roll as a Parliamentary Secretary or to her roll on the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

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? Yes. Just one.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? No.

Organization evaluation
The information would be relevant to some place in Jordan's existing Wikipedia page, but I'm not sure where based off of the sandbox.

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
There were no images or media added.

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?

New Article Evaluation
This is information that is to be added to an existing article, and is not a full article itself.

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? The rolls an individual has while working in the House of Commons are pieces of important information which I think belong on the Wikipedia page.
 * How can the content added be improved? If there was a link that directly made note of these rolls, it would be improved.

Overall evaluation
The information that is presented in the sandbox is interesting, but I didn't understand how the website that was linked pertained to it. I also think it would have been nice to see more than just one piece of information added.