User:Marianneostos/2019–20 coronavirus pandemic/Egarn005 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) Marianneostos
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marianneostos/2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic/Egarn005_Peer_Review?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_peer_review

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, the lead has the most updated information regarding the subject.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead is clear and concise while also summarizing what the article later expands on.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, the article has brief description where later on the article expands on.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, all the information presented i the brief is later discussed in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? the brief is concise, it summarizes all the talking points later discussed without being overly detailed.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? All the content added to the article is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? All content is up to date. The number of cases to date, number of deaths, etc.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? All the content added belongs in the article an no information is missing.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? All the content in the article is neutral and factual, no opinions.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are no claims that indicate the article is biased toward any position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? All viewpoints regarding COVID-19 are represented equally, everything is neutral and equal.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the content presented is just factual information about a virus, how it can be contracted, how to avoid, and number of cases around the world.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all the information is backed up by reliable secondary sources such as the CDC and WHO.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, the information is thorough and links the resources for more information.
 * Are the sources current? All the sources used is current, because this is on going pandemic, information fluctuates and changes and all the sources keep up with it in a timely manner.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? All the links work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is easy to read and concise. This is an on-going issue affecting a lot of people and it is important everyone is able to understand the information in the article.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are no grammatical or spelling error.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The content is well-organized and divided into he corresponding sections.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, there are media attached to the article and they enhance the understanding of the virus.
 * Are images well-captioned? All images have captions relating to the subject of the image.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, all the media adheres to regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, all images are laid out in an appealing way.

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? The article is supported by more 2-3 reliable secondary sources.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? The list of sources contains more than 1,000 sources and includes links to FAQ's pages from reliable sources.
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary info boxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? Yes, the article includes all of the above.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discover able? The article does link to other articles about the same topic.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? The content added does improve hr quality because it is updated to the most recent information on the virus.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The strengths is having updated and current information, rather than old information on the virus. Since it is an on-going issue, it is important all the numbers and information are constantly updated as it is.
 * How can the content added be improved? In my opinion, there is no other way to improve. The article is constantly updating and providing reliable information from reliable sources and linking all the websites for addition questions/concerns.