User:Madsngo/White coffee/Tif0409 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? Madsngo
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Madsngo/White coffee

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? I did not see a lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? I did not see a lead.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?I did not see a lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?I did not see a lead.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?I did not see a lead. (The top of the article is contents only, not the Lead.)

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, I think the content added are very relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, it is.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No content is missing.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, it is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, the tone is balanced.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, all the viewpoints adequate.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it has a neutral tone.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, it is.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, they affect the available literature on the topic.
 * Are the sources current? They are all accessed in 2020, thus very current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the content is easy to understand, and clear.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes, I noticed a few minor grammatical mistakes.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? I think some subheading can be merged. For instance, roasting and roasting characteristics.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, but not what whit coffee looks like.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes,they are well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, it is the user's own work.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, but I definitely recommend adding more images. Such as the process of making the white coffee and coffee from different countries.

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? Yes, I believe after adding more information to the new Heading, the article would be upgraded a lot.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Changing some sentence structure, also adding new sources, the content is very inclusive, it contains different country's white coffee.
 * How can the content added be improved?