User:Maureensq19/Youth Poet Laureate/LibraryKat95 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? Maureensq19
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Maureensq19/Youth Poet Laureate

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 gave a clear outline of what the award is and what details might be expected throughout the rest of the article. It might useful to include which organization(s) present the award in the lead as well to further highlight the importance and integrity of the award. If you can find a newspaper article or anything like that to cite when discussing previous winners of the award it would really add a layer of interest to the lead as well.

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 interesting especially because I knew little of this award before reading through this article, however there is a lot of listing and and run off sentences in the writing style which make the article flow oddly so consider restructuring the content a little to give a better written flow for readers to follow.

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 is neutral and interesting. The author does a good job or maintain a balance between each section they created especially because it appears this article is brand new and they started from scratch.

As I stated above consider restructuring to avoid listing and run-on sentences to improve the appeal and overall tone of the article.

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
All the links for citations worked for me.

Adding further citations for finalists and winners wherever possible will only add the the credibility and interest in the article.

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
There is a slight grammatical error and or misspelling in the beginning of the 'Ceremony Section': Five finalist are selected from a pool of more than thirty-five applicants who are their respective city or regional Poet Laureates. The wording here is off, a word might be missing or the sentence may need some restructuring.

Each section is concise and the information included in each section the relevant to its respective section, however please consider adding the the main organization who presents the award or the founder of the award in the lead as it should be mentioned from the start as well as in following sections.

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
Consider adding an image of the award seal or award itself. When I did a search on the award I saw some images of the award seal for several states so maybe include one of those and a reference to it and the state.

I think the image included in the lead was high quality and and captioned well. consider adding a few similar images where appropriate elsewhere in the article to improve the overall balance and appearance of the article. Consider including images of previous winners in the section listing winners and finalists, maybe another of Amanda Gorman but another winner or finalist might be preferable to maintain variety.

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
I don't believe this page is published to the public yet because I could not find it upon trying. So far the new article is supported by several seemingly reliable resources and has been divided into relevant and well organized sections. I don't know enough about the award to know it if warrants any additional sections at this time. The article links itself to several other Wiki articles including the Amanda Gorman article but there may be more linking that could be done plus the link to the library of congress could be made earlier in the article under the 'founding' section. More detail might be included about the works finalists submitted to receive the award, just avoid going into so much detail that it might as well just be included in their individual wiki pages instead.

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
There is some grammatical and sentence restructuring work that needs to be done but I am extremely impressed by the current thoroughness of the article considering the creator started from scratch. I am excited to see this article published to the public to create further awareness of African American Literature and award winning work done by African American writers.