User:Laurakripka/Situationism (psychology)/Lcalhoun2019 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? (miguel6514)
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:Situationism (psychology)

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes good amount
 * Is the content added up-to-date? yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? no

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes it is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no all neutral
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The experimental evidence has more pros then cons
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No the content is giving a informational position so it doesn't serve a persuavise position

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes
 * 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 gives a clear understanding
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Good on errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes the content is well organized

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? no
 * Are images well-captioned? no
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? no pictures
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? no pictures

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? yes
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? decent job
 * 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? yes
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? yes

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? better than the first content
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Makes the article have a more clear understanding for the reader
 * How can the content added be improved? pictures/visual representation or reference links that bring the article to life.