User:Mikann1218/Eunuchs: India's Third Gender/Leev99 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) Mikann1218
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Mikann1218/Eunuchs: India's Third Gender

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? The lead describes what an eunuch is in Indian society and a snippet of the film.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does, it includes the films name, year and what the film is about.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not too sure. The ending sentence does tackle what the film is about and the aspects of the culture. But I don't think the lead breaks down the articles major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Too early to tell, only the Lead is published.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Very concise on what the film is. I think there should be more details included about the film.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes it is. It explains briefly about the film and how eunuchs are treated in India.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Not to sure. The last edit was October 2nd.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? It addresses it briefly with the last sentence of the Lead.

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?

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? There is no secondary source of information as of yet.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The only source of as now is thorough as it is the reference for the film itself.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The Lead is easy to read as of now.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are minimal grammatical errors in the first sentence of the Lead.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Well, there is only the Lead. And the Lead is one paragraph, and if more content is going to be added to the Lead I think it should be broken down to two paragraphs, the first being about the culture of Eunuch's and the second about the film or vice versa.

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?

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?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?