User:Lxy80/Japhet Killewo/Routarchita 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)
 * 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?
 * Yes. Gives a clear idea of what the article is about.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes. States who Japhet Killewo is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes. Th lead gives a quick summary of the history of the person, as well as their different roles.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is a good balance of being short and detailed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. There is information on the history and then the career of the scientist.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes. The content was added recently.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No. More information can be added on the history; however, this is not necessary.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No. The article remains neutral and only states information on the person. There is no bias included.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes. There are many different types of sources listed under the "see also" category.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes. Primary and secondary sources are included.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes. There are articles from 2017 included.
 * 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. It is not overly-detailed and it is well organized.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * A period needs to be added to the last sentence under the Career section, but other than that, no.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes; however, the history and the career of Japhet Killewo could be split; however, this is not necessary.

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?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * 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. There are many different sources used.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Yes. The sources are both primary and secondary documents. They cover different topics as well.
 * 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. It includes a "see also" category which helps.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Yes. There is a lot of good information, giving the reader a good idea of who the person is and what their role was.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The article contains the right amount of details, ensuring the article is easy to read, but also informative.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * More images can be added, as well as making a separate section for the history and different areas of work.