User:Mattsoml7031/Opioid epidemic/Racosta0511 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? Mattsoml7031
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Mattsoml7031/Opioid epidemic

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? N/A, the lead of the article was not edited for this assignment
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? N/A, the lead of the article was not edited for this assignment
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? N/A, the lead of the article was not edited for this assignment
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? N/A, the lead of the article was not edited for this assignment
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? N/A, the lead of the article was not edited for this assignment

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, this information is relevant to epidemiology of opioids
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, all sources are from 2018-2020
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? More statistical/numerical information would be appreciated. Most of the current content is subjective, with only one research study to back it up.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Unknown

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, this content is neutral and supported by facts and data, although little data.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? This information appears to be biased towards younger individuals.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Data about recovery from opioid use is not discussed.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, there is o persuasive language used

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all sources appear to be secondary sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, sources reflect available literature and studies.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, all sources are from 2018-2020
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Sources appear to be mostly from pediatric doctors.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? All links appear to be in working order.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Content is well written and easy to read.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? No grammatical errors noted.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, each idea is in its own sub-paragraph.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? N/A, no images were added.
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A, no images were added.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A, no images were added.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A, no images were added.

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? N/A, this is an addition to an already existent article.
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? N/A, this is an addition to an already existent article.
 * 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? N/A, this is an addition to an already existent article.
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? N/A, this is an addition to an already existent article.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes, this adds additional information that was not already present.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Considers the impact of opioid use on children.
 * How can the content added be improved? As stated above, using more statistical data to support your info. Without this, your data is very subjective.