User:Madsngo/JOEY/Gertjjor 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)
 * Madsngo
 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * JOEY

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 paragraph is much more established and gives a great overarching description of the restaurant chain. The introductory sentence is exactly what I would expect clicking on a Wikipedia page, as it clearly describes and introduces the topic. The lead does briefly discuss the various locations, and that is a major section in the article. The sentence discussing that the restaurant features a bar area was not as fitting, and maybe could have gone in the theme section. I do believe that the lead was concise though and hit on all the major aspects of the article.

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
The content did not seem to be old data, and I appreciated that there were even examples of recent location openings. This touch of new dates made the content seem relevant, and up-to-date information. It was interesting that you chose to include the other companies that fall under the umbrella of JOEY, I wouldn't have expected it, but I felt like it added to the company side of JOEY.

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
I believe that throughout the article it has a very neutral tone, and off the first couple reads I did not pick up on any biases. I do see that you discussed the Seattle location the most, but I do know that is because you work there. I think that maybe there could have been more representation of the Canada locations, as it is originally a Canadian chain restaurant.

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
There are many more sources that have been added to the article, and all of which seem to be dated within the past four years. I clicked on a few and they did work, and are relevant to the article topic.

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
The article is broken down well into important sections of the topic, which helped give a great overview of the topic. The history section could read a little smoother, but otherwise the article was easy to read, and the sections did not seem to be too choppy. I am horrible at identifying grammatical errors, so I cannot say that I picked up on any.

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
The images are placed in appropriate places with appropriate captions. However, I would like to have seen an image of JOEY restaurant as opposed to the restaurant that falls under the company's umbrella. The picture in the menu section was appealing, and really enhanced that section of the article.

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?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * 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?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

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
There are paragraphs within the sections that are a bit vague and could use a bit more content. However, I do feel that reading the article did give me an understanding of the company. I would like to have know a little bit more about the Canadian locations as well. Overall a huge improvement to the article.