User:Magicccfff/2020 California wildfires/Axolotl21 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?
 * Magicccfff
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Magicccfff/2020 California wildfires

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, the content has been updated in the lead through the addition of new information concerning the wildfires.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The current article already has a clear and concise introductory sentence. The new information describes the current wildfire situation in more depth.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, the lead does include a brief description of major sections through the explanation of the overall situation and drivers of the wildfires.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, the lead does provide new information that is not present in the current article. Furthermore, it adds more specific information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * By itself, the lead is not overly detailed and is brief. However, it provides substantial information for the overall article once it is added to the already existing information.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content added is relevant to the topic since it goes into more detail than the overall introduction.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content added is more up to date than the current article information.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The content can go into more detail about the drivers of the wildfires since it is briefly talked about, yet is still a very strong point.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Because the issue is a current event, I don't think it's addressing an equity gap since it is heavily addressed in the media.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, the content added is neutral and has an informative tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are no claims that appear to be heavily biased toward a particular position since the information presented is on the basis of fact.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There are no subjective view points. In reality the current work is presenting new and updated information to the larger issue at hand, the wildfires.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, the content added informs the reader about the wildfires location, drivers, and the increased amount.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Because the topic is a current event, the source information may be limited. However, the new content uses a news article which can be biased and a source from a non-profit fundraising site.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Again, because the topic is so current, there is not a lot of literature that can be found. So, no, the sources do not necessarily address literature on the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are current since the event itself is current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Both sources are written by organizations that report the information. Therefore, they do not necessarily include a wide spectrum of marginalized authors.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links are accessible and work.

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?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * The article is more complete due to the addition of new information that helps the reader understand the current situation.
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * Some strengths of the content added is that is more detailed and current information.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * The content added can be improved by expanding not the drivers of the wildfires, because it's such an important part of the article, but is mentioned briefly.