User:Lingsha999/Xiao Hong/Jiayi Li 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? Lingsha999
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Lingsha999/Xiao Hong

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
The introduction contains a concise and clear introduction to the subject of the article, as well as a brief description of the main part of the article. A guide does not contain information that is not in the article, the main content is concise, but can be written more succinctly in the The Love of Xiao Hong section.

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 and is also up to date. There is no missing content or content that does not belong to it. This article does not deal too much with a equity gap in Wikipedia, nor does it deal with historically underrepresented populations or themes.

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 added content is neutral, written about Xiao Hong's childhood and love, so no claim seems to be seriously biased towards a particular position. The content added also does not attempt to convince the reader to support or stay away from another position.

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 the new content has been completed by reliable secondary sources of information, which is complete and reflects available literature on the subject. These materials are recent and well used. These sources were written by different authors who did not include historically marginalized people where possible. These links are functional.

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 very simple, clear and easy to understand. There are not many grammatical or spelling mistakes in the article. Content added organization is good, in each paragraph has a good description of Xiao Hong's childhood and love experience.

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 are no images and media evaluation in your article.

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 whole of the article is very good, the content added to improve the overall quality of the article, Xiao Hong's experience is very easy to understand. I think you can also add some of Xiao Hong's works to let readers know more about Xiao Hong. Well done!