User:MORGANV15/Ella Barksdale Brown/EmilyLiddell 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? MORGANV15
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:MORGANV15/Ella Barksdale Brown

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No
 * 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? Yes, the article does not call her an anti-lynching advocate, but the lead does. It does implicitly say this, but it would be nice if it said this explicitly.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is very concise.

Lead evaluation
Good. It may need a sentence more or so to elaborate a little more on the content you added.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date? As much as it can be
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is very little on her personal life.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes

Content evaluation
The content is pretty in depth on the work portion of her life, but is lacking in the other sections.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, everything seems neutral.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There isn't really more than one viewpoint people can have on the biography of a person, so it is represented well.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Tone and balance evaluation
It is neutral in tone and informs us concisely on the topic while not adding in any opinions.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? They seem to be reliable sources, and I think the main source used is technically a secondary source since it is a summary of a primary source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I feel like there is more to find on the topic than two sources.
 * Are the sources current? As current as they can be considering the age of the person being written about.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? There are two new sources but one source is used almost exclusively.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they do.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources seem to be reliable which is good, but you lean on one source a bit too much.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is easy to read what was added.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are no obvious errors to me, but I could be missing something.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? There are sections that make sense, but I feel like the sections with one or two sentences either need to be combined into one section or fleshed out.

Organization evaluation
The organizational structure works, but the only problem comes from the lack of content in some of the sections.

Images and Media
No Images were added.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Compared to the original, this is a much better article, but I would not say it is complete yet as there are still gaps in information.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The content was neutral and written concisely and in an easy to read manner.
 * How can the content added be improved? The biggest thing that needs to be improved is the amount of content in every section except work and adding more sources.

Overall evaluation
Overall, it is very good, but I would suggest fleshing out the sections other than work. Also, more sources need to be added.