User:Lollins/Delia Opekokew/Mackenzie422poli 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) Delia Opekokew page, lollins and mackenzie422poli and Tashasalem
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:

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? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is brief and does not introduce new information that isn't in the article

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? yes it is
 * Is the content added up-to-date? yes it is
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? not that I can find, all the information is relevant
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? the article addresses Delia Opepokew, an Indigenous female lawyer that was a trailblazer in her field, so I would say yes it does relate to a historically, underrepresented population/ individual

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? yes, there is no opinion stated
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? potentially slightly under due to a lack of available and relevant information.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no it simply states fact about her life, education and career.

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. However some sources are slightly older, but they refer to a certain award or interview at the time of the event happening therefore, I would say its current with its time and relevant to the article.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Some of the sources are Indigenous awards so 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, the information is organized into its appropriate section.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes as stated above.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media There are no images added


 * 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?

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? I believe it does, an interview with Delia was one of the primary sources used, therefore yes. In addition, there is limited available information on the topic.
 * 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? Adding the description of the awards and why she was awarded them is important as well as correcting her education and career section.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? In the beginning there wasn't much info on this page so all the information about her upbringing, her linguistic skills, her education, her career, her awards and her publications I would say is a strength.
 * How can the content added be improved? Perhaps getting more access to additional information although there isn't much available.

Overall evaluation
I would say the additions made make it incredibly more informative and educational, as well as providing a better understanding of her life and her achievements which are significant in the realm of minority women in the field of law. Having a accurate article on a female indigenous accomplished lawyer is important in todays day to not only inspiring but significant in spreading awareness of positive female role models