User:Mandymelville/User experience design/Brb0305 Peer Review

General info
Mandymelville
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mandymelville/User experience design
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * User experience design

Lead

 * New content hasn't been added to the lead yet.
 * Maybe you could explain the jargon and abbreviations since the lead doesn't inform the reader where the "X" comes from in all the different abbreviations.
 * Since the lead is already concise, it should be fine staying a similar length so it doesn't become overly detailed for the introduction section.

Content

 * Good use of simple language and sentence structure to make it easily readable.
 * Which section are you adding this to?
 * Maybe say something about the authors where you got this information from to allude to their article even if it is paraphrased.
 * Maybe explain more what makes a test successful.
 * Is Agile software referenced anywhere else before this? If not, maybe explain what it is or hyperlink to another Wiki page.

Tone and Balance

 * I don't detect any bias, so the tone and balance are very neutral.

Sources and References

 * New sources connect with the material and provide good additional information. Sources come from academic peer written journals.
 * Sources are very current since they were published within the last 3 years.

Organization

 * Are the quotation marks there you show this is what you've added, or is this a quote from another source?
 * I saw your note saying you added reference [38], but it does not appear as an internal citation in your sandbox.

Overall impressions

 * Great contribution to further explain usability testing.
 * If this is an individual section, maybe expand it a little bit to add more detail.
 * Great use of new sources and references to add new perspectives to the topic.