User:Melissawwang/Quadratic voting/Mervitan 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) Melissawwang
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Melissawwang/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, but also reviews some old information
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * yes

Content evaluation
I agree with the a lot of the comments that were previously made about this article, including the fact that it was extremely well organized and this made the information that the author provided very easy to follow. There was a lot of new information that I was able to learn about, especially concerning the history of Quadratic Voting and where it was created.

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
Although I did notice some bias when the author claimed that “ideally” governments should mimic what the Colorado House of Representatives. I am not entirely clear on whether you meant that was the ideal way to conduct all forms of voting or just Quadratic Voting. Either way, I would encourage the author to shift away from using biased terms, such as “ideally” but simply state that the use of Quadratic Voting was efficient or implemented smoothly through the Colorado State Government.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes

Sources and references evaluation
I enjoyed how you linked key words that you used throughout your article to other Wikipedia articles as well.

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
In the section about the “Concept of Mechanism,” everything was explained very well and clear. I enjoyed the fact that you even included a table to demonstrate visually how it works. I believe that the Wikipedia page itself already has a section concerning how it was used in the Colorado government, so instead adding a new section, perhaps you could merge the two through your writing. Overall, good job!