User:MadisonFerguson/Sexism of American Media Awards/Zxcvbnm70 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

MadisonFerguson


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MadisonFerguson/Sexism_of_American_Media_Awards?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hello! Here's my peer review for you,

Lead

 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? - Not yet.

Content

 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? - Yes, 4 kinds of media awards has been added, and the content is relevant to sexism.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? - Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - I think the part "The Grammys" is lacking of the sexism history before "Not long ago the music award show in 2012 finally, but reluctantly, went gender neutral." It may makes readers a little bit confused.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? - Yes, the gender gap in media awards have not been noticed enough as far as I know.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the content added neutral? - Most of them are neutral, but I think some of them have a little problems. For example, there is a strong perspective in the sentence "Not long ago the music award show in 2012 finally, but reluctantly, went gender neutral." I think it might be better to change the highly subjective words "reluctantly" to a pure factual description.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? - This article itself is a article about sexism, so although its views are clearly anti-sexist and feminist, I don't think it's a problem to put them in this article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? - It may be appropriate to present some views that do not agree that there is a sexism in media awards.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? - A little bit I think, but still, this article itself is a article about sexism.

Sources and References

 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? - Some of them, yes. But some of them are from the website or news, they may not the very reliable source? And some sources are charge ones, maybe a free one will be better.
 * Are the sources current? - Yes, very much.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? - I think so, this topic itself is a topic for marginalized individuals.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? - Yes, no problem.

Organization

 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? - It's succinct, but a bit disjointed in places and feels like it's missing some information, especially in the first part, which would have been nice if it had added some factual content!
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? - "This started the movement #GrammysSoMale which drew in support from many famous women artists." What is the "#" for? I'm not the local, maybe it's correct!
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? - Yes, very clear.

For New Articles Only
I didn't find the original article, so it's a new one, right?


 * 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.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? - They are very new, and this is a relatively new topic, but I am not sure that some of the information from the news and websites can be considered reliable.
 * 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? - Not yet.

Overall impressions

 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? - It's a new article, it already has the basic framework of a complete article, but it needs to be added to make it clearer and more coherent.