User:Madsngo/White coffee/TreyonReche 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: White coffee

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 is an updated sentence that presents the article clearly and briefly. While the articles do not introduce sections the content bar had me well informed. The lead also does not include information not presented in the article and 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
The content is relevant to the topic and up to date. I would like to see some more content on the history of the term white coffee, or the history of white coffee in the countries provided. On top of this, there is some content missing on the history of white coffee in each coffee.

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
The content added is neutral and shows no signs of bias. On top of that there is no viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented, the article did not try to persuade any position.

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
The content is not backed by many accessible reliable secondary sources of information. There are no peer-reviewed sources, and the link to the tamu.edu was not accessible. Wikipedia pages should link to other wiki articles when possible, however the Wikipedia page should not be used as a sourced reference.

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 content is well written, and I did not notice any grammatical errors that impeded in my understanding of the topic.

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 article includes a photo of coffee with whitener that added to the article as a whole. The captions were appropriate and it adhered to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. I could see photo examples of the other forms of white coffee in the country could beneficial.

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?

New Article Evaluation
The article is notable and includes a couple of reliable secondary sources. The research and inclusion of sources relating to the history on the subject could aid in providing more literature. There are also plentiful of external links that makes the page 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
This article is an notable attempt in introducing the concept of white coffee. The subject is interesting and the details of how each country prepares is it is clear. If additions are added to history of the white coffee, in the country sections, with more secondary sources provided, then the page could be a more solid source of information on white coffee.