User:Miajgoldberg/Maryland School for the Deaf/Tessdekker 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) Miajgoldberg
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Maryland School for the Deaf

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? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No

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? No

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Mostly
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Mostly
 * 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

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? A few
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

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? Yes
 * What are the strengths of the content added? Largely neutral, very comprehensive, clear layout, concise, informational
 * How can the content added be improved? Some very slight grammar issues, sources in a few locations

Overall evaluation
I loved reading this piece! I was very impressed by how comprehensive it was. Right off the bat, I thought the layout of this article was very clear and helpful, and I love that each campus of MSD had its own section. I thought it was very thorough and well-researched. My only comments are as follows: First, because the sentence about deaf students outscoring their hearing counterparts did not have a source attached to it, I think that may come across as slightly biased, so I would either rephrase the wording or attach a source there. Second, I thought the section about Checker's was perhaps a little out of place or too unrelated. Maybe with some changes in wording it could be tied to the rest of the article better, so it makes more sense for a reader. I think you could also add Nico DiMarco as a notable alumni! I loved that you included that section, because I think it's something people usually like to know. Also, this is very particular, but I wonder if maybe you could explicitly say that MSD stands for Maryland School for the Deaf at some point, because right now they are sort of used interchangeably but without ever explaining what it stands for (although it's probably pretty obvious!). Maybe just saying 'Maryland School for the Deaf (MSD)' early on in the article. Otherwise, I thought this was amazing! Great job!