User:Mdivestea/Southwest, Syracuse/Anais Mejia Peer Review

General info
JJ415 & Mdivestea
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mdivestea/Southwest, Syracuse
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Southwest, Syracuse

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes, they did a great job adding more context to the lead that gives the readers a better understanding of the neighborhood.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * It was a bit unclear if they are leaving the sentence from the original article or if they are deleting it and using theirs. I would clarify this, in either case think the sentence could be improved to make for a better introduction.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It does not provide a brief description of the major sections of the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the information in the lead is reflected in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think other than the adding a brief description of the main sections and improving the introduction sentence the lead is concise and effective.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * All the content in the article I think is related to the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * The content within their draft is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think there is content that doesn't belong, but I think the community based organization section is not only sparse but the library is a public resource not a community based organization.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes, it does. The draft does a good job at addressing how the community has historically been underinvested in.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Yes, all the content added was neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No there are no claims that appear biased in the article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No I think the article accurately represents the neighborhood and its stakeholders.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No the content does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of any given position.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes all the content has sources to back up the material
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Yes, after checking the sources it is clear that the content reflects the cited sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are thorough and reflect available date. The only source that wasn't super in depth was the data sources which reflects the content type.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are all as current as possible given the topic.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * They are written by a diverse spectrum of authors, often from news or government organizations. I think the sources lack representation of historically marginalized individuals, but I think this is because there aren't many sources available written by marginalized individuals.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * Given that this is a very specific and narrow topic for an article, I think they did a good job at getting the best sources for the article.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All the links I checked work!

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * I thought the article was both concise and well written. It was also very easy to follow and clear to the reader what the other was trying to convey.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not find any errors when I read the content within the article.
 * 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, but I would delete the section about community based organizations as I think it is a bit unnecessary.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * Absolutely, the authors took a very bare article with expired links and little information and transformed it to an informative page about a local neighborhood that gives the readers a good idea about what the neighborhood is like!
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * The strengths of the content is the sources that the authors provide and how well written and concise the added content was.
 * How can the content added be improved?
 * For the most part I don't have many suggestions, but still think the authors should change the community based organizations section.