User:Lhigginbotham/Louise D. Clement Hoff: she/her, American, 1926-2020/Annaschechter 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

 * Lhigginbotham
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Lhigginbotham/Louise D. Clement Hoff: she/her, American, 1926-2020

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, very effective first sentence that encapsulates the artist. We have her lifespan, location, and her mediums. The only thing I would change is add a link to the articles for still life, figure painting, etc.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Not really, unless the table of contents counts. In which case, yes and it looks great!
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No. The Lead tells me what will follow in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise. A very powerful single sentence.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. I learned about Clement Hoff's education, her teaching career, her work as an artist, and her personal life.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * It appears to be. The artist is deceased, so there should not be too much "new" information coming out. References were all retrieved recently as well.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Was family very important to her? There is a lot of information about her family and siblings, which is great. I wonder if there's a connection to that in her artwork? These aren't technically things to answer in the article, but just things I was thinking about based on the content, since it is heavy in the family department. Still, the article feels balanced in terms of content.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes! This is for an artist who did not previously have an article, so it helps to fill equity gaps.

==== Content evaluation - One small note: I wouldn't refer to the artist by her first name because it feels too casual. Usually I stick to last name. The instance I'm referring to is the last sentence of the artist section: "Louise had also shown her paintings at the Hahn Gallery and Atlantic City Art Center" ====

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * In large part, yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Under the artist section: "...was honored with an impressive retrospective exhibition..." The word "impressive" is too biased. It seems as though the exhibit is being praised and this could indicate some sort of bias (even if there isn't any bias, that word is too complimentary rather than factual)
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The viewpoints seem balanced. I suppose 2 of the sources (2 and 4) are used multiple times, so this could be read as over-representing those sources, but I think there are other sources involved, so it doesn't feel alarming to me.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Nope. The only thing was the word impressive. Other than that it is absolutely great.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Most every sentence has a source connected to it, which is really great. Some don't, such as "Born Louise Darling Ulett as seven of eight children to John George Ulett and Eva Adele Ulett in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Clement-Hoff graduated from William Penn High School." I would like to see a source for this.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Because Clement-Hoff is so recent, I wonder if there are more sources out there on her, but the selection of sources is already strong.
 * Are the sources current?
 * They appear to be. The Senior Artists Initiative is from an interview in 2000, so it is 20 years old. That is fine by my standards, especially as it is one of the older. There's an excellent source from this year! The Philly Tribune obituary is so excellent to have. There's also a source from 2015. Very current, very appropriate.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Ayana Jones and Dominic Mercier are two of the authors. They represent some diversity in the source list. Historically marginalized individuals are included.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All links work! Nice.

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?
 * I think there's a little bit of tense wonkiness. For example: "Louise had also shown her paintings..." This isn't clearly written to me. Maybe revise to say "Clement-Hoff also exhibited her paintings..."
 * This is a run on sentence: "Her first marriage was to husband Walter Robert Clement, her second was to George Hoff."
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, perfect breakdown!

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No images yet.
 * 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 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?
 * I think there could be more sources. I question the ClustrMaps.com as a source, but that is because I have no clue if this site is trustworthy.
 * 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. Could be more, in terms of still life, as I mentioned above. Other than that, good navigation available.

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?
 * We get to know Clement-Hoff's family history, education, her role as an educator, her role as an artist, some exhibitions, awards, and info about her death and legacy. This is all very good.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * I would like to know more about her actual works of art. Images may help with this.