User:Melmadrigal1315/Louisa Margaret Dunkley/KM0019 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? Melmadrigal1315
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Louisa Margaret Dunkley

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? lead has shown addition of content to some paragraphs
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? lead clearly shows what article will be about
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? lead does not show descriptions of the different content that will be provided
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? lead does not provide new information not already cited in article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? lead is concise

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? content added is relevant to section
 * Is the content added up-to-date? yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? more content pertaining to subject's life during her fight for equal pay could be added

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? content is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? there are no claims pertaining to a certain bias
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? more info can be added to solidify subject's veiwpoint
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? content seems to have no bias

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? sources seem reliable
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? sources seem to be factual and have no extra/unnecessary info
 * Are the sources current? source are slightly dated, but still relevant
 * Check a few links. Do they work? links do work

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? content is simple, could be made into a higher level of reading
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? no errors
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? more content should be added to give more depth to article

p
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?

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?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? the added content does give more details
 * What are the strengths of the content added? content added provides further detail on person's death and work
 * How can the content added be improved? more specific content could have been added about the movement itself and the influence on the later world