User:Lxy80/Japhet Killewo/Lf266 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? Lxy80
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Lxy80/Japhet Killewo

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? This is a new article, so every piece of information presented is representative of what has been added by Lxy80.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The introductory sentence concisely describes who Killewo is, such as where he's from and what his occupation is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead section is a little too long and includes information that could benefit in being in a section by itself. For example, it is not necessary to list Killewo's degrees in the lead section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, there is some information in the lead that is not mentioned anywhere else.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? This lead is a little too detailed. In my opinion, the sentences about his education should be moved into a new section entirely.

Lead evaluation
This lead does a good job explaining the basics of who Killewo is and his career, but it is a little bit too detailed. The information about his education should be moved to a new section to make it a little more concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, all the information is relevent to Killewo.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? The content is up-to-date, considering the timeline of Killewo's career.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Everything that's included is relevant and belongs to the article.

Content evaluation
Everything included in this article is relevant, up-to-date, and belongs. Good job!

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, everything states has a neutral stance.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Nothing is particularly biased towards one opinion or another.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There are no viewpoints that are unfairly represented.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? There is no persuasion in this article.

Tone and balance evaluation
This article upholds the standards of neutrality for Wikipedia. There isn't anything I see that is particularly biased or opinionated. Good job!

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The third source, "Japhet Killewo," is not a reliable secondary source in my opinion. It appears to be created by Killewo himself and includes a section called "Amazing Things Japhet's Made"
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? As far as I know, the sources are thorough and reflect everything about Killewo that is relevent to this article and available on the Internet.
 * Are the sources current? The sources are fairly current, since all the links work and the books were published in the last decade or so.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, the links work.

Sources and references evaluation
Most of the sources included seem to be very reliable, secondary sources and are a good representation of the available info about Killewo on the Internet. However, I would get rid of the third source, since it may violate Wiki's guidelines about including sources written by the subject of the article.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? There are some sentences that I would double-check to ensure they're written clearly. For example, the leading sentence, "Japhet Killewo is a Tanzanian doctor and epidemiologist Kagera, Tanzania" is not technically a complete sentence.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? I can't see any spelling errors, but there are some grammatical ones. I would recheck your sentence structures and your use of tenses. In the first sentence for the Career section, for example, it should read "after graduating from Makerere University," not "after graduated from Makerere University."
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The included sections are well-organized, but I would include an Education section and put where he went to college, etc. there are not in the lead.

Organization evaluation
The article is well-organized and includes all the relevant sections, except perhaps an Education one. As well, I would go through your article again and check the grammar of each sentence, because there are a few examples of where it could be improved.

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
N/A

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, this meets the notability requirement as there are more than 2-3 secondary sources about Killewo.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? There is a decent number of sources (10) and as far as I know, they're representative of what is available on the Internet about Killewo.
 * 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, with the exception of the article lacking an Education section.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? Yes, there is a very good number of links to other Wiki articles.

New Article Evaluation
Considering this is a new article, there is a very good amount of information and sources about Killewo, and definitely meets Wiki's notability requirement. Good job on including lots of links to other Wiki articles too.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? This is a new article, so the article is way more complete than it was before!
 * What are the strengths of the content added? This article seems to give a good overview of Killewo's career without giving too much or not enough detail. Everything is neutral and unbiased in nature. There are also plenty of links to other Wiki pages and reliable sources.
 * How can the content added be improved? This article could be improved by looking over the grammar and sentence structures, possibly removing source number 3 (as it seems biased to me), and creating an Education section so that it isn't in the lead.

Overall evaluation
Considering this is a new article, this is a very good collection of information about Killewo, and I'm glad that this will be available for others to see and possibly add to! There are many strengths to what is currently in your sandbox, and in my opinion there are only a few, small ways that it could be improved - and these are listed in my previous comments. Great job and happy editing!