User:MNascone/Truddi Chase/GFrye 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? MNascone
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VRGDtcol8AOnfASbUAwpAT-kKcoNZNd3DXkgyNypXFs/edit#

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 lead hasn't been updated, but it still provides a good overview of the main sections of the article.
 * Yes, the lead includes an introductory sentence that describes the topic.
 * Yes, the lead includes brief descriptions of the information in major sections. However, I think this could be expanded on a bit.
 * The lead does not include information not present in the article.
 * The lead is concise.

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?

Content evaluation

 * Yes, the content is relevant.
 * Yes, the content is up to date.
 * There isn't content that does not belong.

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

 * Content added is neutral and uses signal phrases to indicate the source. Content added does a good job of addressing some of the issues of the validity of Truddi Chase's account without being overly skeptical.
 * No claims appear heavily biased.
 * It may be good to also mention the emotional abuse by her mother in the body of the article. More detail about her therapeutic process would also be helpful for balanced coverage.
 * Some of the information about the validity/authenticity of her account may put readers in favor of one position, but I think it is necessary information to include.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

 * Yes, all content is backed up by interviews, newspapers, etc.
 * Yes, sources reflect available literature about Truddi Chase.
 * The sources aren't necessarily current because Truddi Chase has since died, but the articles are from the time when she was alive. In this sense, they are current.
 * Yes, the links all work.

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

 * Yes, information is well-written.
 * Content added had some minor grammatical errors that I left comments about in the google doc.
 * Content is generally well-organized, although I was slightly confused about where some of the drafted content would be included in the article.

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

 * No images or media were added, but it might be good to include a picture of the cover of Chase's autobiography in the infobox.

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

 * Content definitely improves the quality of the article and introduces important information.
 * The content added gives the reader a better understanding of why Chase's condition developed, as well as why some a skeptical of her account.
 * The content added has some minor grammatical issues that could be imporved.